Denard Post Game Comments

Submitted by Fhshockey112002 on

After tonights game it is good to see that Denard has become a leader on this team.  I always hated the Tebow post game "no team will try harder" speach, but I like what Denard had to say following tonights loss.

"I want to say sorry to everybody who watched football, watched Michigan football and whoever follows Michigan football, I want to say sorry and it won't happen no more. I am going to be accountable for the rest of the season. I'll tell you that much."

Most disappointed I've been in I don't know how long, the 22 years I've been living, this is the most disappointed I've been in myself.

http://espn.go.com/colleges/michigan/football/story/_/id/8415193/michig…

I hope we can put this behind us and move into B1G play and get a big win two weeks from now at Purdue.

misterpage

September 23rd, 2012 at 3:26 AM ^

Do you need glasses Denard? Do you?? Why in the fuck are you throwing to Gallon when 3, yes THREE ND defenders are in front of him?? WHY?? WHYYY aren't you holding so tightly to that precious football after you've thrown 4 first half picks?? You fumbled!!! REally??? Why isn't that football so tightly held that when you run it the refs have to pry it from your cold dead fingers?? But mainly..WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU???!!! WE HAD THEM!! ALL NIGHT!!! OUR D STEPPED UP BIG TIME DENARD! where were ya bud? you sucked it up.  You lived up to every critic's critique.  I honestly can't wait til you're gone.  I'm inspired by the type of person you are, but not the type of qb you are.  You can run but ya can't throw babe... sorry.  Mattison had his boys ready tonight tho.. i'm stoked about that Michigan D.

justingoblue

September 23rd, 2012 at 3:42 AM ^

I try to keep my frustration in check as much as possible, but can anyone please stand up and tell me they've done more for Michigan football, more for the University, or more for Ann Arbor than Denard Robinson?. I'm not denying that those people exist, but how long is that list?

Win or lose, if Michigan's roster is stocked with people of Denard Robinson's character, it will represent everything good about college athletics. He is truly a special person and athlete.

Wisconsin Wolverine

September 23rd, 2012 at 2:18 PM ^

Yes.  I think we can all agree he had a horrible game, and you may go "ARGH DENARD" & that's ok.  I acknowledge he played poorly (well, he threw poorly.  He ran pretty well).  But at this point, he's morally tenured as far as I'm concerned.  I've bought in to Denard as a person and an athlete, and I'm willing to live & die by his actions.  He gets my unconditional support based on everything he's done already.  So, both things are true - terrible game, there's no way around it, but still a great man.  Let's go forward.

tenerson

September 23rd, 2012 at 3:36 AM ^

Who else deserved the Notre Dame game the last two years? Who else deserved the OSU game last year? No one did. He has won us more games by himself than he has lost us. This is the first game I can say that he cost us. Don't be a douche. Denard stuck with this program throught everything. He would do anything for this program and if you think your fucking hurting because a football game that means absolutely zero to your real life you need to get a clue. None of us (well, most of us) will never have a clue what it feels like to feel responsible for the loss of a football game, much less an important one. Judging by your comments, you are one of those people. This game had no effect on your life outside of a few hours of being able to say "your" team won or lost. Get a clue. Without Denard the last 2-3 years would have sucked. We certainly miss bowl games for 3 years and we don't win a BCS game wihtout him. 

Sopwith

September 23rd, 2012 at 6:42 AM ^

were you saying "can't throw" when he was ripping Nebraska and Ohio apart with accurate passing in back-to-back games last year with a BCS trip on the line?  

He can throw.  He just can't do it from the pocket game after game with consistency.  But if some of the idiot posters on here think this team has a better chance to win this season with Bellomy at QB, seriously, find another sport to follow and try harder to actually know something about that one than you do about this one.

white_pony_rocks

September 23rd, 2012 at 12:35 PM ^

but what good is having a backup qb if you don't put him in when the starter is struggling?  ND put in rees when golson was sucking, there isnt another team in college football who would have kept denard in after that 1st half.  And if hoke is worried about affecting the psyche of denard then deanrd shouldnt be a qb becasue he cat emotionally handle being pulled when he clearly should be.

jscbus

September 23rd, 2012 at 3:32 AM ^

What a shitty 22nd birthday. Keep your head up Denard. Just a little overly ambitious tonight. My dissapointment lies in knowing that this is the last season I'll get to see you in a winged helmet. Here's to your 2012 B1G Championship. Cheers.

 

Follow Thy Fullback

September 23rd, 2012 at 3:36 AM ^

I'm not mad at him. Honestly how many wins would we of had the past couple years without him? Not the last 2 ND games for sure or the 3 OT Illinois game off the top of my head...he had an off night and he held himself accountable...ND will get there's against Stanford, SC, or Oklahoma there D isn't that great and it showed moved up and down on em

Felix.M.Blue

September 23rd, 2012 at 3:49 AM ^

I didn't have a problem with Elvis or Collins. Those guys were cursed by bad calls, injuries and bad calls/luck.

Loved Driesbach but he didn't last long, he could have been a real good one.

Griese didn't do much until his Senior year and I was pissed Brady wasn't the starting QB in 97. Wasn't sold on Griese at all.

Henson just wasn't going to be great because he wasn't in football 100% and him leaving really screwed Michigan but Lloyd pretty much screwed them as well considering Navarre and Migerny were the only 2 QB's left. That's on Lloyd.

I'm not in love with Denard and I don't hate the kid but he just isn't a QB. He's doing all he can do and he's been the face of the program thru good and bad and is still standing. He'll never go through what Navarre went through but he's been through a good bit.

I do think Bellomy needs a series in each game from here on out. Regardless of what Borgess says Denard is still throwing like he did before. I don't see any improvement.

 

justingoblue

September 23rd, 2012 at 4:03 AM ^

Navarre committed during a 3-9 season and went through a losing season and a head coach at Michigan getting fired? Navarre went through books being published and a fanbase literally divided?

I have nothing against John Navarre (he might be the most underrated QB in M history) but he committed in an Orange Bowl year and had the talent around him to go 37-13 with a Rose Bowl during his time. He never had a coach fired or switch into a radically different system.

Summoner10

September 23rd, 2012 at 4:33 AM ^

None of that makes him a good quarterback or not.......  I've defended denard for years now, but tonights game is impossible to defend.  We lost this game because of Denard Robinson... that is a cold hard fact.  Notre Dame was HANDED this game by denards turnovers.... heck out of 6 turnovers they could only muster 13 points!!!!  But because of Denards bad play we couldn't capitalize on a single thing. 

 

I love Denard as a human being and a representitive of this university and our culture..... but this is the first time I have ever wished that someone else was our quarterback..

Mabel Pines

September 23rd, 2012 at 9:26 AM ^

Sorry, I know everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I do not agree with you.   So if right now, Hoke said "Bellomy is our QB for the rest of the season", you would be fine with that??    I see you posted at 4:33 a.m., so I'll chalk it up to late night babble.   In the meantime, I'll keep Denard. 

Summoner10

September 23rd, 2012 at 3:06 PM ^

I don't think Hoke needs to make a statement like Bellomy is the guy for the whole season, but I am open to the idea of bringing him in to see how things go.  Very rarely in football, or any team sport for that matter, is a loss based on the play of a single player, but that's the case with the game last night. 

Whether some people like it or not Denard and this hybrid system they're using for him are not the future of this team, and if it isn't working a change needs to be made.  Don't just watch last nights game, watch every game so far this season.  The guy has devolved as a passer.  he has gotten appreciably worse in almost every area.  It's just not working.  In this offense his abilities would be better served elsewhere. 

I am not in any way shape or form some Denard or mobile QB hater.  In fact I've spent the last two years defending him and  appreciating his contributions to this team, but it's to the point of enough is enough.  He is a 3 year starter with his second year in this system and there is not only a lack of any real improvement, but a regression in his throwing ability.  At some point we need to prepare for the future, and we can do that while still keeping Denard as a key part of the offense.

jmblue

September 23rd, 2012 at 11:11 PM ^

The Michigan program didn't go through turmoil when Navarre was here, but on a personal level, Navarre went through hell.  He was criticized from all corners.  I don't know if there's ever been another student-athlete at this school who was such a lightning rod for criticism.   People at the games would regularly talk to his father (not knowing who he was) and rip on his son.  

 

WingsNWolverines

September 23rd, 2012 at 4:13 AM ^

me agree with Mark May. Denard plays his best outside of the pocket and where he can be mobile and take off. Borges offense is not designed for his style of play. He's uncomfortable and becomes frantic when he's under pressure causing him to throw with his feet in motion. When he's in his zone (outside the pocket) with room to operate the offense clicks. When he feels rushed or pressured he throws off target passes. He needs to do what he was designed to do physically. Get outside the pocket and run. I understand we don't want him getting hurt but I say let the kid do what he does best. Borges needs to re create his play style so Denard is running again. This pocket passing hasn't improved. From what I saw tonight it almost looks worse. Why the sudden change from last year's style? It worked! If its not broke don't fix it.

TyrannousLex

September 23rd, 2012 at 9:03 AM ^

If there's a serious criticism of Denard as a QB beyond the way he doesn't always employ proper mechanics, it's that he doesn't use his legs as his last checkdown. Hell, the coaches have said that they want him to do it. So you think he's most effective doing what he doesn't do and being even more likely to not set his feet and throw?

Did you watch the first quarter when he was zinging passes to his targets all over the field? The game against AF? Last year against Neb and OSU?

 

Blarvey

September 23rd, 2012 at 9:19 AM ^

I like what they did with the offense in the 2nd half. Running it up the middle and off-tackle worked and they were converting on 3rd down. When they passed, it was either short stop routes or drag routes that were cleared out becaues ND was playing the run. I don't think it is reasonable to think Denard can carry the offense with his arm but as long as they run the ball well, teams won't be dropping five or six back into coverage and create more opportunities for Denard to throw into double or triple coverage.

M-Dog

September 23rd, 2012 at 10:43 AM ^

Holtz actually had an astute comment for once.  he said it was Notre Dame's game plan to keep Denard in the pocket.  This would work to Notre Dame's advantage if they could manage do it.

The surprising thing he noted, is that Michigan cooperated by having the exact same game plan to keep Denard in the pocket.  Even though it worked to Notre Dame's advantage.

 

M-Wolverine

September 23rd, 2012 at 1:49 PM ^

How bad Denard I'd throwing on the roll out, how it cuts off half his field to see receivers and then gets him throwing across his body, and how it hems him in and cuts off his running room. And the stats show he throws better from under center. I'm not sure where this myth started, but guys like May and Bacon are just pulling things out of their ass.

True Blue Grit

September 23rd, 2012 at 11:26 AM ^

during the football program's darkest time in many years.  He was loyal to Michigan and stuck it out here when no one could have blamed him if he left.  For that reason, I'll always be incredibly grateful and appreciative for him.  BTW, to compare what John Navarre went through with Denard's career is ridiculous. 

umchicago

September 23rd, 2012 at 12:40 PM ^

this guy loved dreisbach, but he didn't last long.  that's because he was inaccurate and got beat out by Griese, the guy he wasn't sold on, but took care of the football and led a national championship team.  dreisbach was a good athlete for a QB but a poor man's denard; less athletic and less accurate.

now, he wants bellomy to get reps in games.  why?  sorry, but his future is a backup.

typical dude who's favorite QB is the backup.

wlw723

September 23rd, 2012 at 5:28 AM ^

I totally agree denard is a force on the field,but he is no qb. He is to short always throws off ballance and is good for 3 turnovers a game singlehandly.its time hoke pulls the plug, put him in as a slot reciever and on punt and kickoff returns.give bellomy the opportunity to grow this season.denard is a josh cribbs. You want him on the field but not at qb. He will never make it as a fourth string qb in the nfl.but would be an asset in a josh cribbs position.yes he puts up numbers but football is a team game, we have alot of talent the scouts cant see because of denards lack of accuracy and consistancy. And bottom line is the only numbers that matter are the ones on the scoreboard..hoke had the right idea, just the wrong qb. I think gardner is doing a hell of a job at reciever. And if denard would join him at the position it would make bellomy's learning curve alot easier. We need to quit playing rich rod ball and get back to big ten ball.

ILL_Legel

September 23rd, 2012 at 5:32 AM ^

It times of adversity I always think of the quote "It is not what happens to you, it is how you handle what happens to you."  I heard Leyland use it but I'm sure he heard it from someone else,

The most interesting thing for me to watch is how people handle adversity.  So i'll be watching just like after the Bama game.  I am still hopeful for a Big 10 championship.

South TX MFan

September 23rd, 2012 at 5:33 AM ^

I love Denard. It's not his fault they're trying to make him run a system he simply can't. Instead of continuing to put him in situations that don't favor him, adjust your gameplan to put him in situations that do. I'm proud of the way the rest of the team stepped up too. This could've gotten out of hand easily but they never gave up. On to B1G play and hopefully better days for Denard.

TheTruth41

September 23rd, 2012 at 10:25 AM ^

Borges did the same thing early on last year in trying to get his west coast system implemented. Yes it makes sense when 10 guys on offense can run that system but much more difficult when your lone outsider is your QB. He gave in as the season went on and we started to have success. Why he feels the need to go back to the west coast offense for the time being is beyond me. It's not putting Denard in his best position to help the team and be effective which isn't putting the team in the best position to win. Once he puts Denard back in his comfort zone you'll see The interceptions go down and the offense become more of a consistent threat. He found the formula that worked last season. Why you shy away from that now makes no sense.

M-Dog

September 23rd, 2012 at 11:17 AM ^

Maybe it's not a case of "Poor Denard, he's being forced into a system that does not suit him by mean 'ole Al Borges".  

Maybe Denard asked Borges to work with him to make him a better passer so that he at least has a shot at QB at the next level.

I dunno, I'm just making shit up in my head.  But maybe.

 

TheTruth41

September 23rd, 2012 at 11:29 AM ^

You honestly think Denard would be that selfish?  You honestly think Denard is thinking about his NFL QB stock right now?  You honestly think Hoke woud allow one person to experiment his craft to improve his draft status at a certain position as to sacrifice to The Team, The Team, The Team?  Yes it is important for Denard to progress as a passer but not to the extent where he has to show NFL scouts what he can do over what The Team needs him to do.

I do think Denard is being forced into a system that does not suit him.  I'm sure a lot of people realize that.  My issue isn't 'poor Denard' my issue is Borges seemed to have it figured out how to best use Denard by the middle of the season last year and for some reason he's gotten away from that this year.

M-Wolverine

September 23rd, 2012 at 1:57 PM ^

Thy wont play him to develop him because it would hurt the team, but they'll utilize him in a system he can't handle because it'll hurt the team? Wha? How exactly are they using him differently than the end of last year? The difference is Denard decided to throw to the guys in the wrong jerseys last night, and didn't against Nebraska or Ohio.

wlw723

September 23rd, 2012 at 5:49 AM ^

Denard does play with heart, but he is not a michigan style qb. He is a rich rod qb. And its not his fault. But to return to a michigan quality team, we have to play michigan football. And michigan football is pound it up the middle.... then hit them deep.we cant cater our program around one player.but we can utilize our players in our program. I hope the alumni let hoke take over the team soon or we are lookin at another 6 and 6 season.

DirkMcGurk

September 23rd, 2012 at 8:11 AM ^

I am so over this Michigan Football shit. Dear fans stop regurgitating what the coach says. We need to play good football and that is how you win. The Big Ten sucks because it is a old man league with old blow hards thinking we need to play 3 yards and a cloud football. Keep playing that way and keep being the SECs bitch

In reply to by DirkMcGurk

Cope

September 23rd, 2012 at 10:11 AM ^

As much as I agree with your repulsion of stereotyping Michigan football, I am repulsed when I hear anyone refer to the B1G as an old man's league, whether you or a South Carolina lineman or anyone. Please stop. It's insulting to those of us who have respect for our league in comparison to other leagues, despite having a down year. Now I'm going to go read jhackney's snowflake again, laugh, and avoid morning after cat fights.

5th and Long

September 23rd, 2012 at 12:52 PM ^

DirkMcGurk - think that's a pretty reactionary post. We haven't been "three yards and a cloud of dust" as a team for decades. (see Edwards, Manningham, Toomer et al). Yes, we try to establish the run first. But guess who else has that philosophy? Alabama, LSU... The SEC is becoming known for stifling defense. Defensive struggles in games. That's the hallmark of old man B1G games. And when you say there are old blowhards... Beliema, Hoke, Meyer, Pellini, O'Brien....are younger or the same age than Saban, Miles, JLS. And no I didn't actually look up if mt last line is true, but I'm sure I'm close

The Wolf

September 23rd, 2012 at 9:46 AM ^

My critique of this post would be to the wonderful usage of ambiguity -- "Michigan style QB", "Rich Rod QB", "Michigan quality team", "Michigan football".  Great terms for sound bites from the coaches during press conferences, but what have you actually said with this comment?  Michigan style QB - do you mean Dennis Brown, Rick Leach, John Wangler, Elvis Grbac, Brian Griese, Tom Brady, John Navarre, Tate Forcier, or Denard Robinson?

By "Michigan quality team" do you mean the "Mad Magician" point-a-minute teams, do you mean the stereotypical Bo-era team of 3 yards in a cloud of dust, the Bo-era teams that utilized an option running game, or the teams of the past 20 years that have largely lived and died on the arms of big-time gunslingers?

"Michigan football" cannot simply include when the team is victorious.  Guess what, Denard Robinson is the University of Michigan's starting QB -- to me, that means he is a "Michigan style QB" -- and also that this TEAM is a "Michigan quality team."

Perhaps my purpose and point has been lost in this rambling response, but the continued use of such annoyingly ambiguous terms and short-sighted thinking have grown increasingly tiresome to me.