October 27th, 2012 at 11:29 PM ^
October 27th, 2012 at 11:30 PM ^
October 27th, 2012 at 11:30 PM ^
Is it Bellomy? Is it Borges? Is it the lack of Denard?
BTW Arizona beat USC; Rich Rodriguez is happy.
October 27th, 2012 at 11:32 PM ^
This offense sucks and will continue to suck next year too with the plays Borges run.
October 27th, 2012 at 11:42 PM ^
The REAL question is, "are YOU going to continue to suck?"
October 27th, 2012 at 11:33 PM ^
That's all part of switching systems. We were extremely fortunate that RR didn't pull an LC on the way out, and extremely fortunate that Denard wanted a degree from the University of Michigan more than he wanted a Heisman. Unfortunately, we were not fortunate enough to watch Denard get a full season of good health.
I'll say the same thing I said when RR struggled: shit happens, and don't judge the coaching staff until they have their own fifth-year seniors. Besides, does anyone really think that Hoke and Borges aren't going to stay up all night trying to figure out their options here?
October 27th, 2012 at 11:33 PM ^
October 27th, 2012 at 11:36 PM ^
See you go sparty in a thread and the trolls come calling. Go to sleep and lets reconviene tomorrow when we are much more retospective and coherent.
October 27th, 2012 at 11:39 PM ^
...English?
October 28th, 2012 at 12:34 AM ^
Yeah its a dialect called drunkard, do you disagree with the sentament of the post, or just taking potshots on the only thing you can? Your response also proves my point, thank you.
October 27th, 2012 at 11:34 PM ^
Way to go Irish.
October 27th, 2012 at 11:40 PM ^
What I love is how people in here think that the decisions are so simple, so obvious, and that the men that spend their lives making these decisions are IDIOTS when they don't do what THEY believe is the best thing to do in any given situation.
The answer is obvious. If Hoke and Borges thought that Gardner gave Michigan a better chance of winning the game, we would have seen Gardner at QB. They didn't feel that way, so we didn't see Gardner. Simple. Why is that so hard to understand?
October 27th, 2012 at 11:53 PM ^
October 28th, 2012 at 12:43 PM ^
That they were wrong in thinking Bellomy could manage the game. I've been hearing that Gardner didn't play because he hasn't seen QB snaps in some time. If true, how does a logical find not have a problem with that decision from the coaching staff? Many of us wanted to see Devin move to WR, myself included. I don't think any of us expected that move to mean Devin would not even be an option at QB if things turned ugly.
October 27th, 2012 at 11:40 PM ^
October 27th, 2012 at 11:40 PM ^
Michigan has failed to score a touchdown in a game 6 times. 3 games from 2000-2011, and 3 times this season. We've turned a once-in-a-graduating-class event into a once-every-few-games event.
October 27th, 2012 at 11:47 PM ^
That's a crazy stat.
October 27th, 2012 at 11:49 PM ^
October 28th, 2012 at 12:45 AM ^
I would assume in a two way tie, head to head matchup is the first tie-breaker.
October 27th, 2012 at 11:42 PM ^
how bad is borges?
October 27th, 2012 at 11:46 PM ^
October 27th, 2012 at 11:42 PM ^
DG at QB is not just a theory. He came in a couple of times last year and looked OK, not great, but OK. He did not look intimidated or overwhelmed. And you could not just blitz him every play.
October 27th, 2012 at 11:45 PM ^
Again, do you REALLY think that if Hoke and Borges thought that DG gave Michigan a better chance to win that they WOULDN'T have put him in? If you believe that, there is no talking to you, because you're delusional.
October 28th, 2012 at 12:01 AM ^
Agreed and well said.
We all forget that we are working with imperfect information. We don't see practice, we don't talk with the players, we don't know anything other than the games we see on TV.
We debate the strategies of the coaches because it is amusing and they are human, so their decisions can be questioned.
What really can not be questioned is their motives- they clearly are in this to get a victory for Michigan. So I think it is pretty clear that they felt that at the present time, Gardner was not the better option at QB (perhaps because he has not practiced there or whatever...)
Of course, fair points have been raised about whether DG should have been in a position to have been the backup, or whether more effort should have been made to recruit scholarship QBs...
October 28th, 2012 at 12:02 AM ^
I think they thought RB looked better in practice, but an actual game situation under duress is a different animal. DG has been able to handle actual game situations.
They have their eyes on the future, so they don't want to kill RB's confidence and they stuck with him.
October 28th, 2012 at 12:25 AM ^
I'm trying to remember when Gardner was in a similar situation to Bellomy today--not mopping up or coming in for one play, but trying to run the full offense with the starters on the field and the game in doubt.
And what I'm coming up with is the MSU series after Marcus Rush put Denard out. Successful long pass, then a pass thrown from beyond the LOS, then two sacks including not getting rid of the ball on 4th and 21.
And then the third quarter series against Iowa that ended in a sack and an intentional grounding penalty.
It wasn't pretty, not that there was any reason to expect it to be. More than half of the passing plays resulted in sacks. It really wasn't much better than today, it just never lasted as long.
October 28th, 2012 at 12:31 AM ^
Gardner's most successful stint at QB was in the 2011 Illinois game, when he came off the bench and directed the offense on our last few drives. He threw a TD pass on 3rd and long that pretty much clinched the game.
I can understand why he didn't play tonight - I assume he hasn't practiced at QB for weeks. But going forward, I think it's clear from Bellomy's performance that we need to try Gardner there. From here on out, Gardner should - at the least - be splitting his practice reps between QB and WR, if not going back to QB full-time. This will also help him get ready for next season, when he may well be our best option at QB.
October 28th, 2012 at 12:12 AM ^
He showed little in his mop up time last year other than the ability to scramble. His passing was erratic and nothing to write home about. He wasnt a frosh last year so that is not an excuse. He had practice time last year. Obviously the coaches who see him day in and day out, saw the same things I am saying. Not that I am an expert. You dont move the most precious commodity in sports out of the position if he is going to be elite or at least ABOVE average at the position.
The pining for Gardner now is a lot like the pining for Bellomy each time DRob f**** up - it is always greener on the other side.
October 28th, 2012 at 12:47 PM ^
only require an ability to threaten the run with the zone read and complete simple short passes. I don't think anyone would argue that Gardner wouldn't be a more threatening presence running the zone read than Bellomy.
October 27th, 2012 at 11:43 PM ^
I'm seriously interested in hearing how Hoke still went with Bellomy after the kid was 0-11 with 2 INTs and 3 sacks for -16 yards? There's being loyal and there's being stupid.
October 27th, 2012 at 11:44 PM ^
October 28th, 2012 at 12:50 AM ^
That's probably the most disappointing thing about the move. I wasn't expecting him to be all big-ten but I was hoping by this time we'd see the light coming on, and him being a decent contributor at wr. He catches a couple balls a game but when he's had catches to make a big play it seems he's failed to convert most of the time.
October 27th, 2012 at 11:59 PM ^
This was the worst Michigan qb performance Ive ever seen in my 30 yrs..This one is on Hoke and the FACT our back up qb is now where near he has to be.. Hes a redshirt..This is his second year..Did he not know that they were going to blitz..Just Terrible...
Also, my dad asked if the stud left hander coming in would start and I said probably not..I was wrong
October 28th, 2012 at 12:03 AM ^
You missed another Russ, Russ Rein in 1984 against Iowa . . . Michigan's last shutout.
October 28th, 2012 at 12:12 AM ^
I thought I saw the worst of what a UM offense could be in 2008 with Sheridan and Threet...
I was wrong...
October 28th, 2012 at 12:52 AM ^
I'm pretty buzzed so the QB's name is escaping me (Demetrius Brown??) but he threw 5-6 int's in a game that UM lost by 7 pts.
October 28th, 2012 at 12:07 AM ^
Given Bellomy's performance tonight trying to pass the football, it's no wonder Denard is starting quarterback, even if he was not a phenomenal running QB.
What makes things worse, Borges runs very simple passing plays, which allows the offense to be a sitting duck for the opponent's defense. There is a lack of creativity and screams predictability. At least with Devin Gardner's running ability, you allow 3 options instead of 2: hand off to a running back or attempt to pass.
In addition the OL is porous, the current RB corps is either very ineffective or very green. As for the WR, should we begin to consider giving the starting WR's rubber cement for their hands.
Finally, can someone tell Borges about a hurry-up offense or no huddle offense. Let's not give the oppoenent's defense to complete homework for next week's class on the field!
October 28th, 2012 at 2:08 AM ^
... Borges passing plays are *not* simple. The West Coast offense has, as Seth alluded to in an early thread, a symphony of route-trees that nearly always spring someone open. We have had a ton of dropped passes, non-crisp routes (particularly Devin Gardner), and inaccurate passes.
For example, in the last two games, third-and-goal, Borges dialed up pass plays that got a receiver open at the goal line crossing left to right - an easy throw for a right-handed QB to make if he gets the time. Both times the line blocked, the receivers ran good routes ... and the pass missed. That's not on Borges.
Finally, to get back to the point of the thread ... no, we shouldn't move DG to QB. Any scenario where Denard is out for an extended period means we're done - he's the entire engine for our offense. In a sense, it doesn't matter who the backup is, so we shouldn't strip one position to get no improvement at another.
I feel for Bellomy - he's, what, 20? - he had to know that this was an important game, and every time a pass got dropped or he misread the D that monkey just got worse. I sincerely hope the coaches are basically reminding him that he can't change what happened, he can only go forward and learn from this. He's got nowhere to go but up, after all.
I also fear that Devin Gardner was moved to WR for two reasons: A, desperation - we had no one else who could get separation, and if he can pick up the WR routes well enough ... B, he was going to end up the 3rd-string QB behind Bellomy if he didn't move, because he's not accurate enough to be a good QB either - basically a bigger-but-slower-and-less-practiced Denard.
Neither one augurs well for him, and if they're both true ... well, maybe a full offseason at WR will help him tighten up his routes and his ball-in-flight-radar.
October 28th, 2012 at 12:08 AM ^
I refuse to blame Russell Bellomy. He is a RS Freshman with little experience and the receivers didn't help him AT ALL. Yet again.
October 28th, 2012 at 12:13 AM ^
October 28th, 2012 at 12:48 AM ^
Even Brian pointed out in an MGoPodcast that he thinks that the receivers are trying to make everyone who doesn't want Denard to play QB feel bad with the receivers refusing to catch balls and Roundtree swatting them out of the air.
October 28th, 2012 at 12:55 AM ^
is the guy who caught the first pass was the fullback who almost never gets the ball thrown his way.
October 28th, 2012 at 12:24 AM ^
A few comments which I'm sure have been touched on (given there are 187 posts and counting as part of this thread) but here I go anyway:
1. Denard covers up allot of deficiencies on offense. Say what you will about his passing but the fact that the kid can break a long gain or even a 4 or 5 yard run on any given play - makes up for allot of other offensive personnel deficiencies. More on this below...
2. Toussaint has not been effective at all this year. He is not running North and South. Most will point at Fitz and say its his fault but I think we need to examine what's going on in the trenches. We may be having issues on the offensive line that are not being talked about. Are the holes there? Again Denard's dynamic running ability covers up for what may otherwise be average (or worse) offensive line play. I don't think it's fair to lay all of the blame on Fitz. And for those of you who think Thomas Rawls is the answer I would encourage you to evaluate our blocking up front.
3. I was at a bar watching the game and I could not hear what they were saying about Denard's injury. But I have to think it was killing him to be on the sidelines. The fact that he never went in leads me to think this may be a season ending injury. At the very least this is a recurring theme with him and so we have to be looking at other QB options to finish the year and beyond.
4. Bellomy isn't ready. I won't bash the kid but we all saw what happened out there tonight. It was Nick Sheridan-esque. Given that Gardner hasn't exactly been producing as a WR of late I wonder if we're better off sticking with Gardner as the #1 backup. At this point I do not think that Bellomy can beat any of the teams remaining on our schedule. I also think Gardner would gain valuable time which would prepare him to lead the team in 2013 (and 2014 if he gets his medical redshirt). Nobody can tell me that Bellomy is the better of the two QB's...
5. Lots of issues on offense. Susupect blocking. Lack of game breakers at RB and WR. No heir apparent on the roster as the starting QB. Suspect play calling.
6. Sadenned by Denard's injury. We had an excellent shot at winning this game...
October 28th, 2012 at 10:36 AM ^
October 28th, 2012 at 11:00 AM ^
October 28th, 2012 at 12:18 AM ^
Bellomy only highlighted the continued problem with our offense which is the absence of a true running game from our RBs. And speaking of RBs, why in the hell didn't Rawls get any touches? Toussaint was meh. And while I love him, Vincent Smith isn't exactly a "change of pace" back. He's a smaller slower version of Toussaint. Rawls at least would have been a different look, someone to lower the boom especially when we went to I-form. Is he in the doghouse or is there an injury I missed?
October 28th, 2012 at 12:22 AM ^
October 28th, 2012 at 12:33 AM ^
October 28th, 2012 at 12:43 AM ^
We may not again have an individual player like Denard, who strikes fear into every opposing DC. But the way we're recruiting, our entire team should be more talented across the board in the future.