Derrick Green should be the starter next week against Notre Dame.
Think you're jumping the gun a lot. Green may not have looked better than Smith, and certainly did not look as good as Fitz.
While I agree that Fitz looked the best I think Green clearly had a better game than Smith. His ability to get to the edge and kick it into gear upfield was impressive. Smith had a nice game in his own right but seemed to be just a little tentative on a play or 2.
You're kidding, right?? Fitz looked tentative and ran as if he was trying to avoid getting hurt. All of the RBs need to do a better job of hitting the holes and less dancing.
well there is a mental aspect to coming off an injury like the won he had.
I'm not sure we watched the same game.
If anything you could argue that maybe Fitz was trying to hard to get north/south and missed some cut backs. For sure was tentative though.
I remember him plowing someone for his first TD...looked good to me.
wait what? lay off the peyote
He was good, and that's good. But he didn't do one thing to show that the coaches decision on Fitz was wrong, not one. His one long run was through a hole the size of an old cadillac that any decent RB would do well on. Don't get me wrong, he showed enough that he made a good argument for #2, but nothing at all to say he's #1.
Green = 11 carries for 58 yards and TD which is more than 5 yards/carry
Smith = 7 carries for 12 yards which is less than 2 yards a carry
We know. Stats don't tell the whole story. Green's 30-yard run probably would have been 40 for Smith, since all that run required was speed, which Green is a bit lacking in right now.
Even at 5-10-15 pounds "overweight," Green is still faster than Smith. I'm not sure what you've been watching for the past couple years, but Smith is slow.
Take away Green's 30-yard run, and he still had 10 carries for 28 yards. Leave Smith's longest run in there, and he had 7 carries for 12 yards.
There's no question that Green looked better.
I think Smith was more ready to break a few tackles, but we've always known that. Unfortunately, Smith isn't very fast, and that one zone stretch (IIRC) to the left where he had his shoulders facing the sideline on contact was kind of pitiful.
I think Smith is better at a role right now than any single role Green might provide. I think Green is better all-around. I think Smith can do some things as a power back, he keeps his legs churning and gets his knees high, lowers his shoulders, dips at the hips, and is hard to get a clean hit on. But he, plain and simple, should not be running outside zones yet. His a between the tackles guy all the way. Green can potentially do both.
The potential of the play rather than strictly looking at the numbers. Green has a great upside as soon as he tones up a little. Smith is a better back today. Other than his last run, he never goes down on the first hit and he always falls forward . Green goes down fast when they hit him low. Green had better blocking on his plays. Let's get off Fitzgerald. He is a senior and does a lot of the intangibles like blocking schemes that green and smith aren't ready to do.
Yeah, agreed. For a 240-pound dude, you'd expect Green to be able to pound forward when hit. All I saw was him almost bouncing off backward. He needs some work.
please explain to me how Green may not have looked better than Smith. I like Smith he was running hard, but it was obvious to me he lacks any vision right now. Fitz looked solid, he didn't have the holes the 2nd team was opening for Green. I will take Green over Smith easily right now.
I don't think it matters who starts. There's a stable of at least 3 backs who can get it done.
Agreed. Fitz may have started yesterday, and will probably start next week, but that doesn't mean the workload won't be balanced. Our stable had 14, 11 and 7 carries, thats what I want to see. Regardless of who starts.
Is that there were holes! Holes! To run through. I'd still like to see more push, but it's an improvement over the last couple years.
Notre Dame is definitely not small up front...
May be their best unit...
I think Green should get more carries than yeasterday, but Fitz is our best back right now.
Maybe Green gets more against ND and their big line, but overall, Fitz is our best back.
I love derrick green, but he is not the best rb in the team. He should start next year vs ND.
There is no next year vs ND
think he still need a bit more conditioning to be an every down back although he was in good in the reps that he did get. I think Smith is ahead of him for now.
This. I can't believe that we're making drastic roster decisions based on the opening game against a team that he beat by 50. People do realize that personnel adjustments can be made in-game, right?
Agreed. You make many convincing points. I just want to add that Pipkins should start over Washington on the DL. If we are starting Green, then ND's backs will try to copy his greatness, and Pipkins will give us extra size on the DL.
Man, sometimes i hate message boards..Listen, RB is not just about running..did you notice we didnt pass while Green was in ? barely if at all...RB has to pick up blitzes or your QB can get killed...Fitz is the starter
By the time Green was in all M wanted to do was run the ball and kill the game clock. Green's ability to pick up blitzes is probably not what caused the offense to move away from the passing game. Agreed, that Fitz should definitely be the starter though.
I was just trying to play along with this joke of a thread
This thread is ridiculous and the comment that Green should be the starter is even more dumb. Do you know ANYthing about football? Honest question. Do you realize you have to know the plays? Do you realize a RB has to block? Do you realize that was one game? Do you realize it was CMU? Do you realize Fitz played vs. starters and Green played vs. CMU's 2nd team? I don't know where people get these snap judgements from and truly think they're right. It's a blog and it's opinion, but it at least should be debatable. Should we move Gardner back to WR and put Shane in at QB?
You've been succesfully trolled by aaamichiganfan.
When none of our RB's rush for over 50 yards against ND you will prob think we need to recruit more too
I'm all for evaluating players as they currently are, not necessarily on past biases (e.g. Rawls running better than last year, though MAC-cakes warnings everywhere). But To suggest that 10-15 carries by a couple of backs in a game decided in the 1st quarter informs logical roster changes is just silly.
Green was 11 carries for 58 yards and a TD while smith was 7 carries for 12 yards. You seriously think Smith is better????????? I want whatever you're smoking.
Because 7 and 11 carries are definitely viable sample sizes for determining the quality of a player.
What is the love affair with Fitz? I saw a guy who yesterday missed a ton of open cut back lanes, which looked eerily similar to the majority of his play last season. All this from a senior vs a MAC defense.
What is with using 1 game vs. a MAC team as reasoning for forming an opinion? All of this computer coaches that have no idea what they're talking about.
considering the debate is between a senior who has one darn good year and one subpar year as starter (which, if you notice, is still more than one game of work), and a true frosh who got some carries in a CMU game that was already at hand...I don't see the love affair. I see common sense.
Yeah, stupid 1,000-yard runner coming off horrible injury not meeting your expectations.
Get carries but I doubt he'll start. Fitz looked real good IMO and although it was a small sample size, so did Rawls! Green benefited from some great blocking on his long run. I've little doubt that Green will be amazing but he still has some work to do.
He did lead, but many of the yards came on one play where any of the RBs would have been successful. Even the announcers noticed the O-line play on that one.
I'm pissed about Drake going down, his couple runs looked nice, especially as they were his first collegiate carries
Just no. Fitz looked way better. Derrick Green's numbers are skewed by his one long run which featured a hole you and I both could have ran through.
... I forgot how idiotic threads could be during the season.
Would have been fun to use here.
Grass is always greener....that or each OT/footbaw season becomes increasingly dumber...
Fitz played a goid game and did nothing to lose his job. I can agree with them splitting carries but Fitz didn't lose his job. Green played late in the game when CMU was fatigued. Anyone could have ran through the hole Green had on that long run. I'm not taking anything away from Green. I'm just saying Fitz didn't do anything to lose his job.
I shouldn't post when I'm this hungover...
Green looked pretty tired after being in a few plays in a row. Not sure he is ready for bethe full time back
Green played better than Fitz yesterday. I don't think it really matters who's running it with how good our 2013 OL looks.
You going to update that signature ever week or just the end of every season.
Somewhat related but OT: Did backups on the O-line play yesterday? If so, which ones, and did anyone notice anything good or bad?
The starters started leaving after Green's TD (about 5 minutes left in 3rd quarter). Pretty sure I saw Kalis stay out there for an extra series. Braden and Magnuson played tackle. Burzynski played center. Saw Gunderson in at guard and player participation chart says Bars and Bryant played (didn't notice them when searching for nameplates in the huddle). And some dude named Pliska, who I have never heard of apparently saw the field.
So they were in on the 80+ yard TD drive where Rawls scored and through the fourth quarter.
everybody who played yesterday.
Magnuson got a crushing block on Rawls' TD, FWIW.
Lewan and Schofield sat in the middle of the 3rd quarter, I'm pretty sure. Once Green and Smith started taking snaps it was Braden (LT) and Magnuson (RT) and the O-line ran mostly zone running plays although I saw a power run that got a respectable 4 yards.
Using the OP's logic, because most of the rushing yards came after Magnuson and Braden came in, we should bench Lewan and Schofield!
This is a joke right? Clearly Fitz looked better. you take away the Green run where the O line cleared the way for a semi truck and he had a pretty ok day. He will be amazing one day, but Fitz is the better back right now
I agree with this. I'm not saying Green looked bad, but I could have gained 20 yards on his long run, that hole was so big. If you take out that run, he looked like a freshman. I'm all for giving him reps going forward, but he did not look better than Fitz.
Exactly right! How about this: If Fitz had the hole that Green had on that play, Fitz is in the end zone. Fitz is clearly faster, shiftier, and runs with power. I also thought Smith looked pretty good considering he was hit in the backfield or at the line of scrimmage on almost every carry. I think there is a very healthy problem here: a lot of good-looking backs.
If you concede that any back we would put in the game would have also gained 30 yards (or more) on the play where Green had 30 yards and you take that run out of his stats, he had 10 carries for 28 yards.
Didnt Green go against 2nd stringers? And he looked wiped out... he isnt ready yet... really... he looks good for five carries at full speed...
To me, Drake Johnson looked the best... he looked quick, fast, and tough.
Green definitely looks as if he will be the best of the group, when he gets into shape, however.
Rawls actually played violently, and I liked it.
Hayes looked great, and enough that I wanted to see more of him... I think they should play him alot vs ND who I recall, spurned him.
on the field until into the 4th as did we.
Some of these conclusions that everyone has come to after one game is hilarious.
I don't think Central pulled all their starters like we did, they were losing and probably want to get their first string as much practice as possible. I do t think he played against second string. As to him looking wiped, was this after his big run? Yea most backs after a big run are pretty tired and usually sit the next play out. I'm not saying he's in the best or peak game shape right now BUT COME ON! Reaching to say the least.
You said Drake Johnson looked the best in a comment yesterday as well. You could tell that off of his two carries for 9 yards, one being for 2 yds and the other on a outside run with a HUGE hole. Good job, you're scouting abilities are impressive.
Rawls always looks awesome in garbage time, it's his thing. He's not in the picture IMO.
Hayes. Once again incredible scouting to say he looked great off of the ONE CARRY you saw.
Trust the coaching staff people, they will play who should play. We have at least three backs who will probably get a number of carries next week. All this talk is crazy.
I agree with this guy. We can't rank the running backs based off of this puny sample size. Just be happy we have very quality depth at this position for once.
Are you a relative of Drake or something?
its ND. He won't get a touch till the 2nd quarter, unless fitz struggles he will remain a backup.
Who the fuck cares who the starter is? Green will see carries against ND. Fitz will see carries. Johnson, assuming he's healthy, will probably see carries. Whichever is having the most success will see the lions share of them. Stop bitching over semantics.
The starter will get 2/3 of the carries, so, yeah, the "semantics" matter.
Your idea that the coaches will be flip-flopping their decision on who the main back is throughout the game is unlikely. A back will get stuck in there and given the load, win or lose. The other backs will spell the starter and play in specific situations.
Green is huge but I didn't see him run angry. His legs stopped moving upon contact and I don't recall him getting hardly any yards after contact.
Someone should teach him to turn green like the Hulk when he runs. It will make it easier to tell when he is running angry.
And Green may play when his presence is needed but not before. The die is cast, the results are in, and you don't play a freshman in a big game as a starter. You bring him him in as a change of pace back. And that is exactly what will happen.
More concerned at this point, about injury situation with Drake and Joe Reynolds. The heatlh of the receiving corps is more of an issue than running back. Green is a bowling ball but a straight line guy. He missed cutback holes and opportunities to make big plays yesterday. And he got gaps that Fitz didn't get.
Both for the pointless nature of this thread, and for all the evidently blind people who still think Smith is superior.
They should probably release him from his scholarship if possible. Great points you made, 11 carries in his first game and he could only get 58 yards. Weak, total bust. Fits sucks too, 14 carries for only 57 yards. Horrible! Why do we even have these guys? Dump them all!!!!
/trying to fit in with crazy talk
People are obviously overreacting, but did you think he looked particularly good? I thought he did a nice job finding the holes people opened up for him but also definitely noticed he usually went down immediately after first contact. Tough to understand for a 240lb supposed power back. I'm not saying get rid of him but the results weren't great for his debut
He has had 11 carries, yesterday was his first game ever in college. Sample size is so small, nothing can be known yet. Relax!
I am relaxed. I didn't see much from any of them that made them seem clearly better than the rest, Fitz included. We'll see as the year goes on I guess
+1 for you good sir lol
What is the deal with all this raving about Fitz? 14 carries 57 yards? That's 4 per carry. Cool that he's back from a horrendous injury, but that's hardly something to sit there and be happy with against a MAC team. We'll see really where we're at next Saturday, but I don't get the FITZ IS BACK shit.
I do think Fitz is still the guy, given his experience and non-fumbling, but I think it's pretty clear that he's not going to get 25+ carries a game. They will, and should continue to try out Smith and Green to get those guys experience and see if one can be an immediate value-add to the ground game. By the end of October, I wouldn't be surprised to see one of the freshmen getting more carries on average than Fitz. I also won't be surprised if that doesn't happen.
And didn't get carries against a worn out CMU defensive front. Fitz wasn't perfect, but he was decisive and did well to square his shoulders. If he picked up his feet a little better he would have broke one or two long ones. And if he would have gotten up to 20 carries he likely would have had 90+ yards. Fitz also had another GL run with no blocking and a 3rd and short with no blocking and was hindered by the fact that twice Michigan tried to run counters with him in the game and blocked no one. And don't get me started on the two shotgun delayed draws that looked awfully blocked.
On normal down and distances, when Michigan ran zone runs, Fitz probably averaged near 6 yards a pop. He looked good running out of the zone. I think you need to look away from the ball once in a while to see the whole story.
The reaction is especially humorous in context. After the Nebraska fiasco last year, Fitz posted 193 yards on 34 carries (5.67 ypc) before getting hurt early in the Iowa game (also played Minnesota and Northwestern). Supposedly he was running like a bitch and the offensive line totally sucked.
It is good to know that all is now right with the world.
To be fair, 14 carries for 57 yards is actually only a smidge below an average in-game peformance for Fitz (that being about 13 carries for 65 yards), so there is that to consider. It is only one game, but it was a better performance than typical last year (13 carries for 55 yards average in-game). When it comes to using the stats, we might be better off waiting until there are not nine players - including both QBs - rushing for yardage and the opponent is not CMU, I would think.
OJ really makes that gif memorable. What a talented athlete and entertainer.
About green being (in some people's opinion) overweight, everyone would think he had a phenomenal game, and could start.
I'm with you.
I'm not agreeing with the OP, but this place can be such an enourmous circle jerk at times. Green played well, but it's cool to hate on him at the moment and proclaim Smith as the superior back.
Obviously Fitz will start, but I feel like Green had a slightly better game yesterday than he is being given credit for around these parts.
Smith looks better between the tackles right now. Still think Green has more upside and will become a better everydown back, because I think he is better at attacking the edge and I think he has more burst. But right now Smith brings his legs and shoulders in the hole better than Green.
And it has nothing to do with what "shape" he's in. We still don't know if he can block. We don't know if he's effective catching the ball out of the backfield. He is still struggling when to plant a foot and cut up on zone runs. He needs work on gets his shoulders lower and churning his feet.
Look, I think Green looked pretty good and showed a lot of promise, but as many FR need, he needs time to improve his game before becoming the starter. Right now Fitz is just better, plain and simple.
Now by mid-season, yeah, I'd probably look for Green to be #2 behind Fitz, and still a clear #2. I actually Smith between the tackles more than Green on short yardage situations, but don't run him outside, and I think Hayes should get some 3rd down plays (I think this is being saved for ND FWIW). Other than that, I'm not really impressed with the other backs as of now.
Burn the stadium down!!
"Kill the innocents!!"
Green does go down easily in open field... always seems first contact... but his importance to the team is the inside pounding in the latter half of the game, when the other team is fatigued... then you'll understand his value.... brilliant move by Hoke...
The beauty of it all? The end game.... Michigan has Alabama in its sights..... the country's most storied program was down for a decade, and along with its yang the Buckeyes, they both are on the major rise, whereby in 2015, it'll be us and OSU as the premier teams, and not the SEC.
THE FUTURE...BELONGS TO US.
I love these Michigan "fans" that get their assumptions from the box score. Yeah no shit Green led the team in rushing, we rushed something like 90% to 10% once Morris got on the field. Touissant did his job and took a rest on the bench. That's like saying that since whatever 5th string receiver in a Lions preseason game got more catches/yards than Calvin, we should bench Calvin because he is worse.
I like depth at RB.
I'm more worried that we only had success running left - sounds too familiar for my liking. Plus the read option had no "legs" to boot. Fitz looked great, had primetime vision and ran with authority. Green got his biggest run as a result of a Lewan pancake.
I liked the 30 yard run, but that was really the line creating a huge hole. His other 10 carries went for only 28 yards. Sample size is too small, we can't really compare the two until we're heading into B1G play with four games of carries.
Fitzgerald blocking for Gardner on a pass play. Leaking out of the backfield on play action as a safety valve receiver. Throwing a block on a designed Gardner run. Heading for just the right spot to catch a screen pass. Telling a young fullback exactly how to tweak a blocking angle. And on, and on.
Freshman can play RB. But it's not just running the ball--and even then Green didn't look like an upgrade to me.
Why do we take away their long runs? Did they not happen? Always confused when people do that or say stupid things like that.
Man we should take away all of Barry Sanders and Walter Payton's long runs in their career. They aren't that good without them.
/smashes head through wall
I understand the idea behind the OC's arguement but I agree with you 100%. Some guys are just feast or famine and there is no reason to ignore the feast.
We're not talking about careers, here. There are most definitely games where Sanders, Payton, and Peterson would look awful in the box score if not for one or two long runs.
You should take away the 0 yard runs where the line busted if you're going to do shit like this.
Every run counts the same as in a game or career. You dont go cherry picking stats to say someone struggled by removing a 20,30 or 40 yard run they had. They got that long run, it happened. It is part of their YPC.
But you're completely missing the possiblilty that short runs can be as misleading as long runs. Maybe there were quite a few short-yardage situations. On a goal-to-go scenario, you may only have an opportunity to get 3 yards at most. Not to mention the defenses are geared to be able to stop run plays to the inside, so you may be more likely to get stuffed. And even if you get in, you only get a yard or two to your credit. Not to mention any 3rd and 3-or-less situations where you get the first down (which is all that really matters in that situation). What about the situations where your oline gets no push and you have no chance to gain any yards?
So, yeah YPC can be misleading. But what's even more misleading is chopping out specific runs willy nilly. You have to have a very good reason to throw out a data point. And I argue you simply do not.
It is the same logic behind the "Those 1,000+ yards Denard rushed for don't count!" arguments when people still wanted to bitch about the offense in recent years. Fortunately I didn't see anybody subtracting Gardner's contribution on the ground or Norfleet's long run to get the "accurate" rushing stats that don't look as good from yesterday's game.
I know a guy who last year told me the best thing that could happen for Michigan, would be if Denard went out on the first play and broke his leg. I wanted to assault his face, chose to walk away... People say some stupid things, I remember hearing alot of talk about Denard being a negative for the team.
I just had a guy in the bar tell me with all seriousness how glad he was, and how great it was that we are finally rid of that Denard Robinson.
Yeah. People are fucking fools, many here included.
Side note: I would still love to see Barry Sanders stats without the long runs, just for laughs.
Dennis Norfleet had the highest yards per carry yesterday. He should obviously be the starting runningback.
A few more comments like this and Brian will make you a full time contributor.
Maybe Heiko can talk gorgeous into tossing Norfleet a bubble screen?
I'm willing to bet most of the posters are grown-ass men.
Frankly it doesn't really matter who starts. Both will get carries, it only matters who produces. It looked to me like Fitz can't make lemonade but when given a decent hole, he had the speed to break through for 6-9 yards a pop. I think he will have a real big game and soon.
And I actually think it will be Gardner's legs and deep ball that win this. If he's out there throwing slants and testing the Linebackers constantly, we will lose. If he is throwing a few screens and running play action and using his legs, we will win and probably win handily. I know everyone is scared of him getting hurt but I would rather take that risk of losing the whole season if he scrambles 10 times for 60-70 yards and 2-3 TDs every game.
Green will get his carries. But Fitz is the clear starter. Unless Fitz struggles I don't see Green ahead of him.
This whole thread has made me dumber and I feel like I just spent ten minutes arguing with espn commenters or YouTube commenters.
I might take some time off commenting for a while, or even until negbangs come back and count.
I assume you haven't watched much football in the past... that or you didn't watch the game yesterday.
I hope Drake is heathy.
There's a huge difference between going against a team when the game is in question and going against a team that has thrown in the towel because they have no chance. When a person realizes he doesn't have a chance, he doesn't give it his all because if you give your all and fail, you've failed but if you give only 80% and fail it's not as much of a failure on your part. By the end of the game, even though they had starters in, CMU's 4th quarter starters weren't the same as CMU 1st quarter starters.
And I don't know how anyone can feel confident about the running game yet. I didn't see many series where the Michigan OL could manhandle the defenses front 7 and pick up 6+ yards a down consistently. Michigan put up 5.1 ypc against CMU, and if you take out the DG carries and Morris sack you're down to 4.9 ypc. That's hardly a great performance. Meanwhile, excluding QB yards, Wisconson averaged 9.46 ypc, Florida averaged 6.1 , and Gerogia averaged 6.97 and they all played essentially equivilient or better teams. Michigan still has a lot of work to do on the OL to get the running game where it should be if they want to succeed against MSU, ND, and OSU on the ground.
is small in any way shape or form.
Average weight of ND front 7= 271.14
Average weight of UM front 7= 259.57
Don't know how you can consider ND small considering they have only 3 DL and a true freshman at one LB spot and yet their average weight is over 10 pounds greater than Michigan's front 7.
Central's players had been pounded on by our starters for 2 1/2 quarters. Green came in fresh - if he didn't look good something was wrong. In spite of that, while I won't say he looked gassed, you could see he was breathing hard. I did like watching him, though.
Even though Green's ankle issue was minor, I don't know that we need to press it. I would be shattered if we turned that into a lingering problem with no reason. He has to carry that frame everywhere he goes on that same ankle.
Here is the really cool thing - we can use half a dozen running backs, there isn't an NCAA rule against that like there is against stretching.
He's playing in his first college game, busting his ass, playing at home. He was likely just really excited. His heart was probably pumping a million beats a minute. As has been said by many a great QB, the key to playing under pressure (while this was a blow out, first game for hyped back has a ton of pressure) is learning how to breathe. Green is still learning how to calm down and breathe at this point.
I think your statement bolsters my case, in fact. Fitz starts, with a talented supporting cast. Fitz knows how to block, he knows how to breathe, and he has been there and done that.
Remember too that with his ankle tweaked, Green (most likely) couldn't participate in all the conditioning drills. He might very well not be where he would have been without the injury, excitement or not.
My thoughts are often tempered by reading other comments. I have decided that we need to ask the line not to open big holes. It skews the results and makes silly discussions difficult. (I'm just tossing that in, it is not directed toward your comment, Space Coyote).
For the love of God - what a stupid statement. Green will get there, as will Smith. Green's long run was the result of a frigg'n hole anyone of us would have gotten through. He did what he was supposed to do on that but let's not ascribe too much. On the the plays where there wasn't much there he didn't really create anything. Smith for the most part also ran into a pretty cluttered field. I didn't see Green's speed when he was on kickoff (no way he is a 4.3) and he really couldn't get to the edge on the outside runs. He looked good in his first game against a certain type of opponent late in the game. Give him props and hope he consistently progresses. Not better than Fitz.
Were some of you watching the same game I did? I'm not ready to say Green should be the starter (and I doubt he will be as he is overweight) but Fitz did not run with confidence. Green was not afraid of contact and was running forward most of the time. I'm hoping Fitz improves from week 1 to week 2, but some of you saying Green did not have a good game, what were you watching?
I remember Fitz trucking a dude to score his first TD. He is fine. Not sure what game you watched.
The OP is an idiot.
That's just like your opinion, man
But I believe his thinking is flawed at least. Gotta start the upperclassman, but Green will play.
Here's the best part...ALL the running backs will get better and better through out the season! Fitz will get more and more confident, Green and Smith with learn the offense and get in better playing shape, etc., etc.!
Add that to an O-line that also gets more experience and we will look back on this thread as an example of our embarassment of riches at RB.
Fitz has better vision, Green/Smith will be a great complement to Fitz. I re-watched the game today and Fitz was great. Only one play I saw where he didn't see the cutback/lane.
The OP lost this argument the instant he said ND's defense is small up-front. They're actually pretty huge, and led by two big All-American candidates (Nix and Tuitt) who largely stuffed us last year.
All the Tailbacks had some success which is better than I expected. I don't recall too many plays where they got stuffed at the line of scrimmage. They gained a few but didn't break day light either (aside from a few carries where fitz and green bounced outside). I like Deveon Smith because he seems more mobile than Green and bigger than Fitz. But they all went down fairly easy without much of a boom. Fitz and Green did have some straight power inside runs for touchdowns.
Bottom line: They looked good to start. It will be interesting to see if anyone claims a stranglehold on the position. I hazard to guess it will be a committee all year.
I hope you realize Green was playing against CMU's 2nd and 3rd string defense... Even my 93 year old grandma could run through those holes in the d.
I don't think the O-line got much push against CMU. ND has a better front seven. I don't think Michigan is going to have much luck running the ball.
Yep. Our RBs will ahve about 45 yards rushing in the first half. Book it.
we will have 123.5 yards rushing in the first half. nd had trouble containing temple's qb. Gardner is going to eat them up.
This is why fans don't get paid to make these decisions. My 10 year old could have ran through some of those holes Green had to take advantage of. Fitz was easily the best back out there yesterday. Close between Smith and Green though imho.
You forget to mention that your 10 year old is 6'4" 220 and can run the 40 in 4 flat.
Not possible. Lane Kiffin would have offered him already then.
Fitzgerald Toussaint should start, and it's not even close. Toussaint is more explosive, in better shape, knows the offense better, and is more of a threat in the passing game than Green.
I like Green's future, but you're jumping the gun.
Start, sure. But Green should probably see more carries vs ND because he can move the pile that extra yard or two far better than Fitz. On Green's TD run, Fitz doesn't get it. Green's size and second push got that six. I'd like to see a 60/40 Fitz/Green split.
On Green's TD run, Fitz probably would have dodged back to the right and dove into the endzone fairly cleanly. I agree Toussaint wouldn't have taken the hit so well, but he would have been harder to hit in the first place.
Can someone please explain to me how the ND defense is small? They go 290, 322, and 357 on the d-line, 230, 258, 250, and 245 at LB, safeties are both over 200, and CBs are all over 5'11" 190. I'm pretty sure if you matched up their defense to ours they would be heavier and taller at every single position. They may have the biggest defenses we play all year.
Green has great size and good speed. But he showed NO moves or balance, and went down SUPER easy on first contact (for a guy his massive size). There is absolutely no way he looked better than Fitz.
Green has the physical tools to be a great RB, but he is going to have to learn better footwork and balance if he wants to be an elite back in college. It can happen--see Chris Perry in 2003. But after seeing them for 1 game, Fitz is the better back.
Yeah, but he had a 30-yard run where nobody touched as he ran straight down the field. Therefore, he's better. Duh.
You should retitle this that Green should just see more carries. "Starter" just really means one play - the first of the game. I think we will see more Green next week. A platoon job with Fitz.
And went and got my computer specifically so I could downvote this thread. This is seriously the stupidest opinion I can recall reading on this board. There is no way in all the world that you reached this conclusion by actually watching people play football yesterday. You're clearly just enamored with recruiting rankings and the stat sheet at the end of the day.
There were two running backs yesterday that showed the ability to either make people miss or run through contact, and they were Fitz Toussaint and (shockingly enough) Thomas Rawls. Derrick Green showed off a ton of potential, but very little actual skill. To call for a major depth chart overhaul (Green seems to be 4th or 5th, based on how the coaches were playing guys) based on 11 garbage time carries against a MAC team is asinine.
I hope for your sake you're drunk or high or have some other excuse for this shameful thread.
Note how at no point did I insinuate that Rawls should start, or even get any more carries than he got yesterday. But he ran through an arm tackle, which is more than anyone other than Fitz did.
And Norfleet, but I'm assuming he doesn't count.
Also I don't know why I'm arguing with you, you're almost as bad as Wolverines Dominate.
I apologize for flying off the handle there, I try to avoid personal attacks for the most part, and while I still think your comment above was reaching it didn't deserve a comparison to Wolverines Dominate, who I'm still fairly certain is just a troll.
I agree with you to some extent, I think Green showed pretty conclusively that he's going to be a better back than Rawls, but I think based an a super limited sample size Rawls is playing better right now. Green has a burst that is really impressive for his size, he just needs to learn how to use that power to break tackles.
I think Rawls had a very similar thing going on last year. He had size and power, but went down way earlier than he should have because he didn't know how to use them. What I saw from him yesterday suggested to me that maybe the light went on for him. What I saw from Green suggests that he still needs to learn those same skills, but when he does he'll be an outstanding player.
Anyway, I'm gonna head out for a bit and maybe come back to the board in a few days. I think that would be best, both for everyone here and for my own sanity. Gotta keep myself from taking these things too seriously.
It was just an observation. This board is getting less and less fun with the level of douche-baggery on here. We are all blue at the end of the day
I participated in a couple of conversations about this in other threads on the board yesterday, but for some reason seeing it get its own thread after all that just made me feel like some combination of this guy:
And this guy:
I think I'm going to take a few days off from reading and commenting on the board, at least until the UFRs go up. I think the lack of game film (other than MGoBlue.com's ridiculously zoomed-in highlights) has made me just get angry in places where I would have previously pointed to video evidence. Damn T3 Media.
This may well be one of the most unintentional neg-bangings I've seen around these parts. It is an opinion and everyone is entitled to his or her, but this probably should have been placed inside another thread where it wouldn't have been given such a spotlight.
how unintentional it is. The OP, in general, loves attention. He may have been serious, but I wouldn't put it past him to post something like this just to start a flamefest even if he didn't 100% believe it himself. Especially with the points system not functioning.
I think aaamichfan's account was hacked. Everyone change your password now!
I only type /ˌsuːpərˌkælɨˌfrædʒɨˌlɪstɪkˌɛkspiːˌælɨˈdoʊʃəs/ once, and then I expect the browser to remember it for me.
We have the same password. PANIC!
The only thing I want to contribute to this contentious thread is this: I am just damn happy we have options. And happier to let the coaches figure it out.
A gulp a gulp a gulp.
Did you pick something up while with the bush girl?
This is the danger of too much player hype prior to setting foot on campus. One good game: Heisman!
I think what really happens is a guy looks good at first, but you then opponents get used to them. You can't underestimate the impact of another coach watching every one of your runs and learning all your tendencies. It makes a huge difference that second year where teams are game planning specifically for you
I think hoke just changed it with green who will be a nfl rb. So will damien harris.
At any rate Fitz looked good and he should continue starting. Good to have some good backs to choose from.
just let our coaches use their good judgement here and let them start the back that best fits their plans. NOVEL IDEA....I know.
Based on my recall and because of Green's body type, I would have thought that he would more consistently gain yards but would have fewer long runs. But the opposite was true. Green was less consistent but had the longest run ( 30 for G vs. 20 yards for F). That long rush helped account for his higher yard per rush mean average (5.3 for G vs 4.1 for F).* Yet, the middle among the string of gains was a full yard greater for Fitz (3.0 yards for G and 4.0 for F)** Also, Fitz’s average was higher, when one accounts for the variability.***
This simple analysis disregards the fact that,1. Fitz has an advantage in the passing and blocking games, 2. Fitz gained tougher yards at the beginning of the game with a fresh and not demoralized defense on CMU, 3. this was Green’s first college game and that his upside is enormous and 4. Green may have had for some runs a less experienced Offensive line. However,based on this simple analysis, I expect that, if you put Fitz’s runs together in random order, you would have a higher percent of first downs than you would have with Green. That is exactly the opposite of what I expected.
*On very short runs, Fitz scored 2tds, Green 1. Presumably, Fitz could have gained more yards than one or two if the end zone did not limit him on his extra td run; so he probably would have had at least a 4.2 or 4.3 yard average.
**Median length of run) =3 yds for G; and =4 for F.
***Mean divided by stdev =.63 for Green, .73 for Fitz
Nice math, brother. Best to speak in stats and experience when deciding who starts against a school like ND.
Green shows great potential but in big games there is no way he should start over Fitz.. I do believe that Green solidified his #2 RB role but it should be about a 70-30 split in big games in Fitzs favor.. Gives us the best chance to win
I think Fitz needs to start and deserves too. Eventually I think so time later in the season Green may start but Fitz had a better game and ran harder. When Green came in the game UofM was up 30 and UofM was pounding the ball.
What is the rationale for not rotating Running Backs? I understand you want to have consistency and rhythm, but wouldnt having the tail back as fresh as possible lead to the best results?
In essence, I'm wondering whats the benefit for having a featured tail back
Jareth Glanda at starting RB. Fitz to long snapper. ND will never see it coming!
Much steeper talent gradient between qb1 and qb3 than there is between rb1 and rb6. I want my rb1 to be the one who is best at protecting qb1. End.
Do I win a prize???
Why would we replace Fitz with Green? Why not just use all 5 backs? I could really see Fitz/Green doing a 65/35 split... I want to see Hayes get some touches too since he decommitted from ND to play for the greatest university in the world
I'm going to go ahead and upvote this thread. Can't believe so many people are against Green starting.
then I like Michigan's chances to grind it out, but still score TDs.
If Michigan gets behind in the game, then I think we're looking at another crazy passing circus, INTs and WTF touchdowns with 20+ million viewers globally flirting with cardiac arrest.
I don't need that shit.
Just give me Michigan with a 14 point lead and a nice rotation of Fitz, Green and Smith. And don't freaking fumble.