Denard's dropoff in production

Pretty much.

That Borges pointed out was when he got to UCLA his qb was 10 in the conference in passing that first year. Then he lead the conference the next. I don't think denard will lead the conference but it seems his decision making is just awful. Next year he should be more comfortable and make so

E better reads.

On the overthrown ball to roundtree it looked on the screen that he could have tucked the ball and ran for at least 4" yards of he would have looked right.

perfectly.  

It's really unfair to Denard to base his expectations on one fluke month and all the surrounding media hype he received in September 2010.

Denard running works. It's simplistic but effective. Borges is trying to fit a square peg in a round hole by making him a pro style QB. Against better teams it take patience, stick with it and we will have put ourselves in the best position to win the game.

What you are saying, is that against the best part of our schedule last year which included these teams:

(Total Defense rank)

12-1 OSU (4) 

11-2 Wisconsin (20)

11-2 MSU (43)

9-4 MSU (49)

8-5 Iowa (25)

7-6 Penn State (35)

7-6 Illinois (38)

and Purdue in a mudbath, he is averaging basically the same stats he is this year against 9 teams that are far weaker than the above teams? Only MSU this year and possibly Notre Dame make it into those numbers, yet he has regressed to the same level of production against worse competition. 

This doesn't sound like a Denard problem, it sounds like first year quarterback hitting some rough patches in his first year as a starter and then being forced to adapt to a new hybrid offense because of a system change, thus destroying his chances of progressing from his decreased numbers over the second part of last season. 

with the last paragraph. I do think Denard would be doing a bit better than he is now with RR, but that's just the way it goes. I think Borges has done pretty well given the situation, so the main hope is that Denard gets a lot more comfortable in this system between now and next Septemeber.

Every bit as much as the interceptions, the wasted attempts like we saw yesterday really hamper the offense at times.  Those plays where he has so much time that he stands, surveys the whole field. catches up on some class reading for Monday, and then uncorks a bomb 10 yards past a clearly covered receiver. With no pressure, you can't make throws like that. Iowa and actually many of the Big Ten teams the last couple years have seemed pretty cool with getting no or minimal pressure. The strategy they have adopted is conservative pocket, stay at home, and let the guy throw.  

You never see that in big time college football. Even the run first guys usually will chew you up if you don't pressure them. This is a huge problem for Michigan's offense. For all the pressure a Denard lead draw plays can put on a defense, our pass plays put no pressure on the defense at all. They don't respect our passer to lead a drive against a non-prevent defense.

Since it's been proven that Denard running over and over again can't beat good teams, we're left to cross our fingers and hope for a deviation up from the mean with the passing.

Wait. Your argument is that when you compare apples to apples (snackycakes 2010 vs. snackycakes 2011) Denard 2010 kicked the shit out of Denard 2011, but when you compare apples to oranges (non-snackycakes 2010 to snackycakes 2011 + MSU and Iowa) the numbers are about the same so his performance against snackycakes 2010 must have been an aberration?

Wouldn't an equally plausible hypothesis be that when Denard is used properly against snackycake competition he puts up insane numbers, but when he is used improperly against snackycake competition he puts up pedestrian numbers, as most QBs do?

The relevant comparisons will be:

• All 2010 vs. All 2011
• Snackycakes 2010 vs. snackycakes 2011
• Non-snackycakes 2010 vs. non-snackycakes 2011

Of course, we won't get to make these comparisons until the season ends.

Finally, this whole post strikes me as yet another attempt by jmblue to discount the sucess RichRod had with Denard, and to try, for reasons that completely elude my understanding, to make it seem like the offense under RR wasn't good. I don't understand why you persist in doing that.

It seems to me that the following things can all be true:

• The offense was good under RR but the defense was horrible.
• The offense under Borges isn't as good as it was under RR, particularly the part about using Denard effectively, but the defense is way better under Mattison.
• When plays are designed that fit Denard's strengths, he is good. When he is asked to do things he isn't so good at, he isn't so good.

those numbers really paint the picture...and its not pretty.  its not so gross you want to rip it off the wall but you definitely hide it in the guest bedroom.  denard is an athlete that lines up at qb.  the proof is in his reads and his throws. ive run out of fingers and toes to count the number of long throws hes missed...by yards.  the wr might not always be open but halfway the time he doesnt even give the wr a chance to make a play.  and he doesnt check down hardly at all (latest exception being the koger pass out of the flat vs. iowa).

bottom line is that denard is what he is - a runner.  um needs to run him more. law of averages says you run him enough and hell break a big one.  that should help open up the passing game so he can make easy throws to open wr's.  i dont think you can play to not get him hurt - "YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME!" and i dont think you can play him in borges offense.  heres to him proving that statement wrong next year but its not gonna happen this fall.

that this comparison is borderline insane and the fact that people are nodding along in agreement with it makes me sad to be a Michigan fan. 

Edit: I agree with El Jeffe above. It really is crazy the lengths people will go to deny any kind of positive Rodriguez may have contributed to the program. 

Acting as if a first year starter could not possibly get better in the same system in year two or using his numbers under a new coordinator as evidence that he is maxed out as the QB from the second half of last year makes no sense, yet here everyone is saying "Oh, definitely, that must be it."

The problem I have with this comparison is that Denard's schedule was more difficult in the final 8 games of 2010 than the entire season of 2011. What happens to Denard's 2011 numbers when you take out the 4 off-season games and Minnesota (the rough equivalents of the first 5 games in 2010)? Just finished the analysis:

Rushing: 70 carries, 283 yards, 4 TDs, 4.04 YPC, 70.7 YPG

Passing: 52/100 (52%), 810 yards, 8.1 YPA, 202.5 YPG, 6 TDs (6%), 5 INTs (5%)

For the most part, Denard's passing has been consistent with all of 2011, though straight-up completion percentage isn't the best way to measure this. We might be better off using Brian DSR to determine if there's been a dropoff. OTOH, his rushing yards fall off significantly; despite having half of his season's carries in the second half of the season. [EDIT: this doesn't remove sacks, so his YPC may be closer to his season average (though the fact that Denard's taking sacks is a regression from last year by itself)]

In any case, it is disappointing to me that Denard could not improve over (the end of) last year despite his second year starting at QB, but learning a new system will undoubtedly slow down anyone's learning curve.

Here is what I don't understand. Michigan's offense at the end of the game was unstoppable......SO WHY NOT RUN THAT THE WHOLE GAME?

If it works, keep doing it. If not, start running the ball out of the I.

Last year, Denard was a true sophomore in an offense that, while playing largely to his strengths, requires a ton of repetition and gets exponentially easier with experience. This year, Denard got a different OC with an entirely different philosophy. While some stuff stayed the same, he was still tasked with learning a whole new offense and tinkering with his mechanics. In addition, reads at the line last year were signaled in by the staff whereas this year they're his responsibility. I have zero doubt that with another offseason in the system we will see dramatic improvements from senior Denard. The only question is if the dropoff from the line depth will be too significant to overcome. Denard's ceiling is not his so-so performances against top tier defenses.

Liked the conclusion in particular. I think people overlook this:

"It may be simply that because opposing defenses did not have much game film of him to watch at the beginning of 2010, they could not come up with effective gameplans, but as the season progressed, opposing DCs caught on to his tendencies, and this has continued this season.   He is going to have to develop further as a passer if he wants to become as effective as he was 14 months ago." - jmblue

Reasonable assessment, and I pretty much agree.  Thank you. 

I do think that they are - a tweak at a time - trying to reinvent him because of where the staff wants to go with the offense. I think the question a lot of people have right now is - how fast do you incorporate him into Borges-land? Do you manage that as the previous staff did and say we run this and that's it, or is it better to try and meet Denard in the middle, even if you don't prefer to  do so? I think, simply by virtue of the fact that you have a player like Denard, that the answer is the latter. 

What we are seeing is why schools didn't recruit Denard as a Qb.  He doesn't fit into a pro-style offense.  He is an amazing athlete that is/was perfectly matched to RR's offense.  This one...not so much.

I love the kid, but he's gonna have to make some huge strides in the offseason.

I am just not seeing the same burst he had last year.

I don't mean that as snarky as it appears. But to me the problem with Denard is rather simple. Here IMO is what Denard is good and bad at in the game of football:

Bad:

-Making reads in the passing game.

-Dropping back from center and throwing. Also rolling out and passing.

-Throwing long passes.

Good:

-Running

-Running

-Throwing slants and bubble screen type short passes

-Throwing from shotgun: three steps and release--no reads

To oversimplify: Denard should be doing lots of the latter. And very little of the former. If that means 30 runs--as Urban Meyer said, "so be it--I'd run him every play of the drive if that was working." Why is it that just because he is a QB he has to be limited to 15 or so runs? You wouldn't take your best RB and limit him because of injury concerns or offensive philosophy. If our offense consisted of 25 runs by Denard, 25 by Touissant, 5 by Smith and 20 short-intermediate passes, what exactly is wrong with that?