landing spot. will be interesting to see how he does.
I disagree with this. Our starting TE needs to be a blocking TE, since we're a run first team. I love Funchess coming in on passing downs, but he's not what we need as our first down TE at this point.
Unless you're saying you want us to throw on first down, in which case I also disagree with you.
There are two scenarios, really. Either we start the game off running, in which case Funchess is not our best option. He's a great pass catcher, not a great blocker, certainly not as good as Kwiatkowski. The other option is to start the game off throwing. Funchess would make sense starting in that scenario, I just don't think that's a good idea for our offense.
Do you disagree with either of those?
You are starting to remind me of my wife.... which, yeah, I don't know, man - I didn't come to MgGoBlog for that.
Oh, jeez, yeah, sorry man. I don't want to be that to anyone.
It could be since my last name is "Dogz" that we don't see eye to eye.
still holding out hope for the coner
Your wife knows you're at mgoblog, so you might as well be reminded of her.
You are wise, Stephen R Kass
Norfleet (ALL OF THE NORTH FLEETS) returning punts. Also, I second the motion to see Rawls move up the depth chart.
I don't mind having Gallon return the punts. Honestly, the first thing I want is just someone who doesn't drop punts, and Gallon has turned himself into someone who is quite reliable in fielding punts successfully and not letting them bounce. I don't think a true freshmen will be nearly as successful as that.
While that's true, the second thing should be the ability to make a return. And that's not on Gallon (or Fleet). Our punt return squad blows. On one of those punts yesterday, I'm pretty sure there were 5 black jerseys gunning ahead of the white jerseys straight for Gallon.
As long as we're winning, it's not a big deal, but getting 5-10 yards a punt would make an impact in the long run.
Pretty clear to me that Gallon is being instructed to Fair Catch the punts.
When you say that something should be done at DE, what are you suggesting?
Also - Taylor started at CB over Avery against Purdue, so that already happened.
I don't know if listing the RB spot as an "OR" really makes a difference if you still want Fitz to start. That's like saying you want the depth chart to use letters instead of numbers - it's a de facto non-change.
I do agree with you that I'd like to see Rawls get a shot running the football, just to see what he can do. Start with Fitz - if he's feeling it, ride him. If he's not, try Rawls. If Rawls isn't doing any better, go back to Fitz, but if he is roll with him until he's not anymore.
No changes just hope to see Bellomy get a lot of snaps next game
I'd love to see some pass attempts from Bellomy, even if they are screens.
I don't think that any of the OL true freshman have played yet and the starters have stayed healthy. I like red shirting them at that position.
I know we usually redshirt our offensive linemen but does anyone have the creeping feeling of pure terror regarding our 2013 offensive line if some of these freshmen don't see some snaps this season.
We lose all three interior starters to graduation and Lewan is likely going to leave early so we'll be looking for four new starters to cover our new starting quarterback. (THERE'S THAT FEAR/PARANOIA).
Now revert back to the end of the UMass game and I remember the second team O-Line basically being Jack Miller plus four walk ons.
So jump to 2013 - If we redshirt ALL of the freshmen that means next year's starters are an experienced Schofield at one tackle, redshirt Soph Miller with very few snaps at center and then the coaches choice to fill the final three spots between:
a) a bunch of those walk-ons (Burzynski and Gunderson),
b) Chris Bryant returning from injury and with no snaps under his belt
c) The redshirt freshmen (Kalis, Magnuson, Braden) with tons of talent and no snaps
d) the true freshmen (Kugler, Dawson, Fox, Bosch, Tulley-Tillman) with ridiculously recent memories of their HS proms.
Believe me, I'm not saying the future isn't bright with those freshmen and current HS seniors. I'm just saying that perhaps coach wants to get some snaps for those guys, particularly Braden, Kalis and Magnuson, so they at least have seen some action before they're tasked with protecting a new starting QB. Further, with those five 2013 freshmen replenishing the depth chart, should we be that worried about keeping the extra years considering we'll have quality sitting behind them.
Yes, the OL will need to rebuild next year. Throwing in some true freshmen for 5 snaps during garbage time is not going no make a damn bit of difference. I'm cool with getting guys like Miller and Brzynski some snaps when the game is out of hand, but we're not wasting a year of eligibility to do that.
Our OL next year will be Scholfield and the better of Magnuson/Braden at OT, the best of Kalis/Bryant/Brzysnki at OG and Miller at OC. They won't be very experienced, but a few snaps to burn a redshirt won't make enough difference to make it worth it.
See I don't think it would have been a few snaps here and there. Truth is the second team OL played almost the full fourth quarter against UMass, probably could have gotten two or three series against Purdue, is very VERY likely to get a bunch of series this coming weekend and likely when Iowa comes to town and very possibly against Minnesota.
Again, if we only had two or three O-linemen in the 2013 HS class I'd say lets not burn them but we have five legit players in that class. I think all the experience we can get Braden, Kalis and Magnuson will help and doesn't hurt.
I think it has to be a balancing test, and losing a year of eligibility doesn't outweigh a few extra snaps against UMass and worse Big Ten teams. I think you are seriously overestimating playing a few snaps against some bad Big Ten teams in garbage time where the team isn't really even running their offense. Would you say playing half a quarter or more against UMass when we are up a bunch would really give them a flavor of what it means to play against Nebraksa, MSU, or Ohio? They are going to be inexperienced regardless if we get them 50 garbage snaps this year. Not to mention the issue is that these kids are just no physically ready to compete at this level yet. We risk injuring them, which would be disastrous because that means we have a guy who might not be ready to start next year or misses much needed offsearson training and weight lifting, and risk injurying our other players, notably Bellomy. Losing Bellomy would be tough because then that would limit what we can do with Gardner at WR. I don't disagree with your concern about getting experience for our Oline next year, but playing them in a few snaps this season isn't as important as being on the scout team and participating in the weight lifting regimine.
My take, let them RS if possible and work daily on getting to know the offense they are going to be running next year. Seems to me, much of what we are running this year goes by the wayside once Denard graduates.
I also wonder if there is a possibilty of Schofield moving back to guard for his senior season, if Magnuson and Braden are two of the best 5 OL.
PT in garbage game time won't significantly help the freshmen OL. They'll play when they deserve to play.
Also, I am not on board with everyone assuming Taylor Lewan is for sure gone.
After watching the game again I think there is something wrong with Fitz and I think it's time to look around, somebody must be earning at least look at. Burn a redshirt whatever, in two weeks we entertain the Spartans and we all know how valuable running the football is in THAT game is.
What redshirt do you suggest we burn? Do you think Drake Johnson is our answer at RB this year?
As in the IM or fraternity teams? Novel idea that... I jest, of course, but what do you propose?
Mike Shaw-itis this year, dancing around instead of hitting the hole. Although the O-line is not quite as good.
I don't know if it is the Fitz losing his vision or the OL not getting the correct blocks and opening holes. Either way our non-Denard running games needs to be figured out.
It just looks like he has no patience; on so many of his runs if he just would have slowed it down a bit he would have seen some massive holes/cutback lanes. If he hits one of those cutbacks the defense would have stopped flowing so fast. As it was, the d just flowed hard and he ran into the piles. He'll be back
Taylor makes me feel better about JT graduating after this year. If Blake can return 100% next year that would make for a hell of a CB combo.
I dont mind that Funchess is not listed as the starter, but he still plays more than any TE on the team... At least put him as the 2 overall TE... 4 is a little ridiculous.
Brandon Moore does not need to be listed at 1 anymore, and either does Hopkins until they are actually back.
excuse my panic I could not remember the backs we may or may not have available or if we had to burn a redshirt, just to possibly get somebody to at least bring some competition out there. I would much rather see a tailback get beatup than Denard.
Dileo on punt returns. Gallon has become a fair catch machine regardless of what is actually in front of him. Dileo catches anything near him, is fearless and as evidenced by his one shot at it Saturday, ran north and south once the ball was in his hands.
Any insight on why Norfleet doesn't return punts? Is it just because he's a true freshman and they don't think he can handle the pressure?
Illinois game would be a good test for that. Wait till we're up a bunch and then put him in, in case he makes a big mistake.
Honestly I think the problem is more the fault of our crappy punt return squad.
Do you honestly think Gallon could have done anything on any of those punt returns other than fair catch or get crushed instantly. Most teams run the spread punt formation so that they limit punt returns.
Yes. There were at least two punts where the nearest gunner was about 10 yards upfield of him when he took the ball. I think Gallon is still gunshy from all the fumbles a few years ago.
i'd like to see them draw the depth chart with crayon.
or do you propose something out of the box, like salmon?
or burnt sienna?
i suggest double tight end formation like the patriots (funchess & kwiatkowski), start rawls and let norfleet return everything...
Thiiiiiis!!!! MUAHAHAHA. YES, Thiiiisssssssss!!!!!! Really though, Rawls and Norfleet def need to be getting some more opportunities IMO.
All back-ups. Everyone who is a back-up should start. Duh.
Not saying Omameh is bad this year, but his blocking when pulling is pretty bad. Hope to see him improve by the 20th.
Would it hurt to put Norfleet in the game for a few carries? Seeing what he does with the kickoff returns is impressive. With Fitz struggling, let Norfleet get a series or two in the middle of the game. He has great speed; him and Denard running that hand-off read play could be dangerous.
Dude is 160 pounds. Don't want him to get murdered. You see what happened to Denard a few years ago?
I see what you are saying, but a 6-0 160 is different from a 5-7 160.
So's De'Anthony Thomas. Oregon doesn't run him very much but when they do, he goes for miles. 2 carries against Wisconsin, 155 yards, 2 touchdowns. Small super-fast backs are handy sometimes, and you don't need to run them every down for them to be so.
DeAnthony Thomas is a little bit bigger than last year, and Norfleet is not DeAnthony Thomas. Also recall that Thomas had several fumbles last year as a result of being physically inferior.
He was a 5-7 running back Bo recruited as a kick return specialist (according to Wikipedia (link)) who ended up basically being a four-year starter. He did not have a fumbling problem. Neither did his older brother, Joe Morris, who was also 5-7 and had at least a couple of Pro Bowl seasons for the Giants in the eighties.
Jamie Morris is still third on the all-time rushing list behind Thomas and Hart (although I expect Denard to pass him later this year).
It's not the 5-7 I'm talking about. It's the 160 pounds. Mike Hart was 5-9 tops, but like 200 pounds. Jamie Morris was quick, but also solidly built. Joe Morris was built like Maurice Jones-Drew.
I figured this was pretty obvious.
I'd like to see them starting Dave Baas at Guard instead of Center, and target Manningham more at WR. I think he's earned it.
I kid. I kid.
I'd just like to see more time for the underclassmen that could be starting next year. It'll be easier to play them more against Illinois or Sparty than it will at Nebraska and Ohio. I'm guessing SDE Heitzman, FS Jarrod Wilson, WLB Joe Bolden, and maybe QB Russell Bellomy.
It's looking like Keith Heitzman could be starting at SDE next year if Black continues to add weight. Would like to see more of him in the rotation, especially since he's been playing pretty well. Kovacs is Kovacs, but we lose him next year and the backups are a question mark right now. In the first 5 games true freshman Jarrod Wilson has put up as many tackles as 3rd year Wolverines Furman and M Robinson combined, so next year our Safeties could be TGordon moving to SS and Jarrod Wilson starting at FS. Wilson could use more game experience, too, in that case. It's looking more and more to me that Desmond Morgan will start next year, and maybe move to Mike when Demens graduates, but who'll start next to him is anybody's guess because Ross and Bolden have both been playing pretty well. Would like to see more Bolden/Ross too. It'd be nice to see Russell Bellomy attempt a pass or two before Denard graduates and 8 months of Bellomy/Gardner debating begins. When he comes on they usually just have him hand off and run the clock down. Home against Illinois could be his last good chance for meaningful game time this season.
I don't think any changes should be made...we just won by a shit ton and dominated a B1G team not named Minnesota or Indiana on the road.
Why change anything?
As for Taylor, he's been starting for awhile now...Avery is the Nickel, and due to Purdue's spread they both started and played a bunch of snaps with JT Floyd.
Sure Norfleet and Rawls should get more carries, but clearly the coaches are trying to get their starter, Fitz on track. Whats wrong with that when you're up big?
Well, I say you don't change anything at first. But Illinois is defnitely not Minny or Indy...they are worse. You put in the guys that need more experience with the starters once you're up a few scores and see what works.
All unsuccessful players need to be replaced with successful players.
It is not a change that we should seek, but rather improvement.
I know this is a simplistic answer, but as mere observers of the game, detached from the ins and outs associated with coaching, all we can do is speculate as to who we may think is better based on the sixty minutes of game we see each week. Don't get me wrong, speculation is a fun part of the game, but unnecessary in the grand scheme of things.
That being said, I don't think that there is any change that can be made, because we don't have any adequate OL replacements. Fitz ran well last year with good blocking, and to assume that he will have a Hagrup 2011 dropoff in production due to mental or other regressive issues is possible but not probable. The RB position is probably a more instinctive position than the punter, so I doubt that a head issue can be the cause of such a dropoff. Without any injury of note to Fitz, all signs point to the OL.
Since we've burned his redshirt, I'd like to see Darboh get into the rotation at WR a little more. Regardless of your opinion (+ or -) on Roundtree, we lose him next year; if Gardner wins the QB job over Bellomy, we're looking at a big ? on the outside.
I agree. Jerald Robinson has been out there for a handful of snaps, but hasn't seen much come his way either. Roundtree unfortunately, is not being targeted, whether that is by play call or by his own play, but I would love to see Robinson and Darboh get in some to get more snaps.
If we can get a nice lead on Illinois this weekend, I think Gardner and Gallon should sit awhile so we can see what Robinson and Darboh can do. Get Bellomy in there as well for some snaps.
Funchess should be starting if he's not already, and while I'm not ready to give up on Fitz just yet, I think Rawls should get a lot of snaps against Illinois. The kid runs hard, and you can hear him run. You can tell when he gets out on the field that he's desperate to prove himself, and I think that will carry over into his game. I'd say Fitz and Rawls should split carries for the time being until one separates himself from the other.
I am going to my default position here: I want to see whatever the coaching staff thinks should happen. If I was going to suggest anything, it would be something ceremonial that has nothing to do with the team's actual performance on the field, but I can't even think of anything there, either.
As usual, I'll just trust the coaches to do their jobs. After all, it is what they do for a living.
maybe I would like to see toy'd with is giving Rawls more touches, he is a bowling ball. I still think Fitz will get it right, just needs to plant foot and go.
Everyone seems down on Fitz. I will be the first to say I'd like to see him with more yards at this point in the season, but after watching just about every minute of every game so far this year there has not been a ton of space for him to work with. Denard has gotten his against everyone but Alabama, but it's hard to compare any runner to Denard. He is one of the best runners in college football with the ball in his hands and also makes long runs due to his speed that helps out his average yards per carry. There were times here and there where I didn't think Fitz hit the hole, and I know Rawls came in and looked great. But, at the end of the game after it's over I'm not sure the defense was cueing on him the way they were Fitz earlier and they were in power running packages for Rawls. I really didn't see a ton of room for Fitz to run through. I think the O-line is showing improvement, but ultimately if there are holes Fitz will hit them. So, although he may miss a few holes here and there, I don't think anything is wrong with him, there just aren't a lot of holes for him to run through. I don't think we should replace him with Rawls unless we put Denard under center and are in power running formations. Even still, I'd rather have Fitz in there to break runs. Moral of the story, there's nothing wrong with Fitz, our O-line just hasn't done as well thus far in the season the way they did in B1G play last year (minus the MSU game).
Fitz will be just fine, he needs to stop dancing around and be ok with 3 or 4 yards. Seems every time I see him carry the ball he gets to the hole and if its not there he stops and tries to make something out of nothing, needs to lower his shoulder and get what he can.
Darboh looks real good on special teams; Since we ain't gonna throw no more, I say move Darboh to defense and have him back up Jake Ryan and Cam Gordon
I like our starters, even Fitz. I'd like to see Rawls, Hayes, and Norfleet get some carries, but I'm not ready to give-up on Fitz.
Darboh is playing on kick coverage, and I'm sure that when he's ready to runs some routes on offense, he'll be in the game. Of course, what good is putting him in if we're only going to complete 8 passes per game?
Defensively, I can't complain. Well, not much anyway. I thought our outside coverage was a little loose on Saturday, but other than that I was very pleased. Sure, I'd love to see the front four get a better pass rush, but I'm not sure we have the talent. Ryan is a "manster."
The player I most want to see as early as possible on Saturday is Bellomy; that means we're up big and the back-ups are in.
but I would like to see Smith and Rawls get more touches at the running back position. The lack of production from Fitz has really been getting on my nerves, and his lack of production is the perfect excuse to get the senior more touches and likely the next starting running back after Fitz leaves (or even next season) more experience.
Loving the D so far. They were nasty on Saturday. I was actually excited when they'd take the field. It was almost like, OK, let's see how many yards Purdue can get this time...
Man...I'm shocked at what 4 carries in power formations in garbage time can change the mind of so many fans.
If that is the case lets line up in power formations with Fitz and take away Denard to get him going....
2 things happened last year, we were much better on the interior with Schofield/Molk/Omameh....and not having hopkins right now does hurt us a little bit.
If at any point the rest of the season the passing game can be adequate and by that I mean Denard the last 3 games or so of last season then that will force teams to only having only 7 or so in the box instead of walking down both safeties half the time and tryinh to force our hand.
get some carries this week. I think he and Rawls, with Norfleet sprikled in, will be a great future combo.
Hayes has home-run speed, and doesn't seem as small as I remember.
Totally trust the coaches to know what's going on though.
I'd like to see Barrett Jones listed as backup at all five offensive line positions. But not the same Barrett Jones because then we would be thin. Five Barrett Joneses. The Legion of the Jonesii.