Calm down brah, it's only one game against a good (albeit dirty) defense. Devin will have his day, but until then, Denard should stay.
Edit: I respect your opinion though.
Calm down brah, it's only one game against a good (albeit dirty) defense. Devin will have his day, but until then, Denard should stay.
Edit: I respect your opinion though.
"Calm down" "don't panic" etc....
I've been calmly waiting on Denards passing to improve all year. It hasn't. Wanting to get Devin in the mix more isn't just a panicked knee jerk reaction to the MSU loss like some want to make it out to be.
Agreed. I want nothing but the best for Denard. I think he's an upstanding person in general. He's a great player to have on your side. But his passing is just not good enough.
He improved immensely in a year. But since then, he's improved little as a passer and as a reader. And we're no longer running the same offense he thrived in.
Put him in the game. He can even throw balls here or there, after being handed off to by Gardner. Nothing wrong with that. It would probably kill opposing defenses when he runs out to the left and then stops to pass because by then the secondary will have taken the bait. Or he will get yards because he is fast. But Gardner is the right QB for the job right now. He made some rookie mistakes yesterday but he fits the mold of the offense. As dynamic as Denard can be, he is the opposite when he is under pressure.
This is what I want. I, like many others, came to the conclusion yesterday night that Denard just isn't going to get it down in the end and that's okay. Many, many players cannot get certain things correct, even guys like Tim Tebow, a hard-working and smart guy who can't fully fix his throwing motion. It just happens.
Denard could be a better Percy Harvin. It would be beautiful to watch. He would beat most corners and safeties for the long ball, making our offense have a more vertical game. He could obviously run as a runningback as well. A triple threat because he could potentially throw the ball as well would cause nightmares for defenses. Devin takes the snap, pitch to Denard and Denard runs to the line of scrimmage to throw a touchdown. If the corners or linebackers keep to their man, Denard has a wide open field. I just think it's best for everybody.
It sucks to switch positions on the field when you're so set on one, it's happen to me multiple times, but you get use to the new position and usually things turn out for the better because the coaches are giving you an opportunity to reach a higher potential. I don't think it's going to happen in the end unfortunately but if it did it would be great I think. I honestly think our offense would be lethal with Denard as a triple-combo player.
Boy, is this going to be fun.
Can't wait for the break from this talk so we can fight some more over Bacon's book. Sigh.
Gardner will begin to get significant playing time after the bye. I believe that much of these next two weeks will be figuring out where Denard is going to be used on the field. We have an answer to the problems that we will continue to see standing on the sidelines, and he won't be for long. Denard as starting QB is coming to an end. I wish the best for him whatever the coaches decide to do with him, but it is not going to be under center for long.
that your prediction will prove incorrect. Which means the coaches, at least, believe that Denard at QB gives Michigan a better chance to win.
" but it is not going to be under center for long."
SO he will be exclusively in the shotgun?
On a serious note, I actually agree. I think that the 2 QB set is the beginning of Denard's shift to other positions. Hoke and Borges are smart enough to realize that the fan reaction to sinply bumping Denard frmo QB would be insane, so they are working it in.
Both Devin and Denard are playing like total shit. I'd like to see Bellomy take a few snaps if we have a good lead over Purdue.
The best players should play, and while that probably isn't Bellomy right now, I'd like to see if his decision-making is better than completely embarrassing.
I didn't even have to read past the title of this post. That's absurd. Do you really think the team is better off with a QB who has started 0 games than Denard? Please.
In fact, I think there are probably a lot of true freshman QBs better than Denard. Denard basically makes the same mistakes as when he was a freshman. With a real QB under center, Denard stands a good chance of winning the Heisman as a RB.
It's Gardner, not Gardener
There was a thread yesterday asking if Devin should start and the response was overwhelmingly No. Despite everything that happened yesterday, Denard still gives us the best chance to win every game we play.
And I'm so tired about the NFL Qb thing, WHO CARES?!? If we judged every starter based on how well they would do in the NFL then every spread team would never play. This isn't the NFL, I doubt Denard cares about the NFL, and what the NFL thinks doesn't affect how our players play in college
kids come to UM to play football and win big 10 championships. THE NFL DOES NOT MATTER you are absolutely foolish if you prioritize the NFL potential of a team over getting good players.
College success and winning are what matters. If you care so much about the NFL, go watch the F***ing NFL.
If after the game, Brady came out and said:
"Waaaahl, we played Devin because we just realized that he has more potential to be an NFL qb than Denard does, and after all, the reason both of them are here is to play in the NFL. Sure, Denard may have given us a better chance to win, but he won't be an NFL QB in 5 years, so it was really an easy decision."
is a huge difference between a kid dreaming of the NFL and wanting to be developed so he can make it there, and coaches using NFL potential as a basis for making decision for a college team's best interests. They should not do that.
No, this isnt about coaches using NFL potential as a basis for who starts but it is about parents of current and future recruits thinking these coaches are making decisions that is in their children's best interests.
It's not like the OP's super special and unique reasons could be made into a comment on the first thread.
In his defense, he just got to 100 points, so what better reason to re-post a pointless discussion from yesterday and provoke flamewars?
Threads like these are why M-Live exists - BILG, I encourage you to go there and find some wise, like-minded individuals to converse with.
Negbombs don't exist anymore, so it's impossible for you to lose points from the MGoMob just because you post "I want Devin to start" or "You're all complete morans for not agreeing with me." Mods are the only ones with the power to neg you at this point, and they almost certainly won't do it because you say something they disagree with. They might do it if you feel the need to create a pointless thread when this has already been discussed, however...
You can't forget the sheep.
I don't agree with BILG, but posting what he did is not an M-Live rant. He was thoughtful and did not attack Denard or any other kid. Again, I disagree with him, but it's wrong to write off these opinions as only worthy of the dolts at M-Live
M could still finish 11-1 or 10-2....if they collapse AGAIN..then maybe...but lets not panic...I dont think Hoke did a good job preparing this team or his game plan..Poor play calling on offense and a horrendous 4th down call caused the loss..with 6 mins left we were at the 8 ready to tie the game its not like we got blasted
the 30-40 mph winds. I'll admit Denard will never fire them like Big John Navarre, but I think we can cut him a little slack for errant throws in that wind. Denard is our best 'QB' and the game was there to win yesterday. I hate losing to Sparty almost as much as tOSU, HOWEVA I'm still confident 9 plus wins and a high end bowl game are in store for this season. Let's be happy the D still looks good (compared to years past) and we have a numer 1 class coming in. The future is bright and Denard will be just fine.
The wind certainly had an impact on throwing the ball, but we have had trouble getting accurate passes all year including without wind. MSU also had to play in the same wind...we have a serious issue passing the ball.
Not this year; Devin's not ready yet. He still missed reads and made freshman type mistakes. Denard gives us the best chance to win still. Neither QB is going to succeed if we don't have a running game, which is honestly on the O-line. Their seeming regression is troubling.
I don't see how Denard gives us the best chance to win when he's leading the NCAA in interceptions.
Mike Martin is tied for fewest interceptions thrown this year. I think he should be qb!
Go watch the Notre Dame game again and you will get your answer.
Nah, let's not consider that.
I think the ND game is the microcosm of DRob's play.
He struggles, he struggles, and then boom, he explodes.
The wind took a somewhat inaccurate passer and made him into a terribly inaccurate passer. So OK, maybe we play Gardner a little more on days w/ 30+ mph wind.
whoa there. Devin was 3 of 7, with 2 completions in garbage time, and missed a wide open touchdown. Let's not go annoint him yet.
Denard was a bad play call away from tying that game up
Devin played equally poorly yesterday. I don't know why people think he's Tom Brady all the sudden. The poor passing performance was not on Denard yesterday. It was on the wind, the Offesnive Line, and the playcalling.
are valid and certainly made it a lot more difficult on Denard than it would have been, but you can't deny that a lot of his incompletions were because of bad mechanics, not stepping into throws, bad decision making, and Denard just missing open receivers. It wasn't all on the wind.
And why didn't he get to set his feet and step into his throws? Because there was a ton of pressure from blitzes on every single down, and our OL couldn't block a thing.
Denard was sacked 7 times yesterday.
saying that wasn't part of why he struggled, because there's no doubt that it was. However, there were plenty of other instances where he had time to step into a throw and just didn't do it. Not to mention many of the bad decisions he made came when he was given ample time to throw. You can rightfully put some of the blame on those other factors you listed, but you have to put some of it on Denard just not playing well, too.
Yeah, It's not like he's been throwin duds all year or anything. Look, I've defended his passing game all year... "He'll settle down", "it'll come around", and "It was better last year"... But there comes a point when you have to assume it's not gonna happen. I've seen no improvement and I can't imagine he's going to all of a sudden start throwing lasers.
I agree with you.
Exactly right, I say, watching from the 20 yd line yesterday. Our blocking was not good; it got worse as the game wore on. Their defense was just tougher. No time to set feet, and the effect of being hammered over & over produces a gun-shyness. Witness Tom Brady against the Lions in the preseason this year. Same thing.
One of the adjustments that Denard and Borges will need to make, and will be able to make, is to counter blitzes.
Teams have been afraid to blitz Denard so far because he may take off, but Sparty showed that it can be done. Michigan did not seem to be prepared for the all-out commitment to blitzing Denard that MSU had. Denard and Borges will now need to spend more time preparing for hot reads and blitz counters.
But it is a very valid argument. I love denard, I mean love him. Lol. But the truth is, he's not a QB and never will be one. He's a great athlete at the QB position. Watching college QB's who can actually throw a ball to a WR without just throwing it up like 500 is actually frusterating to watch. Every nice pass is always followed by, "why can't denard do that?" If we have to ask those questions I'm almost positive that the coaches are asking te same questions.
If it's not technical, it's def mental for why Denard is missing so badly. I know he loves this team so much and probably wants to do whatever he can to make huge plays each down... That's where te ints, overthrows and missed check downs come in.
Devin might not be the best option to come in this year, but even the idea of replacing denard for a few plays could be very telling. This staff knows something, and I'm pretty sure it's how to win.
now that they've gone to 20+ DRob carries a game. Maybe it's a good idea to give the backup a little experience if there's a good chance you're going to need him due to injury. (Like yesterday.)
I'm not as in favor of starting Devin at QB as you are. That being said, there is some merrit to what Urban was saying in the booth. If Devin is one of the best 11 offensive players he should be on the field more. I would like to see him get more snaps in some of the formations with both Devin and Denard on the field. I actually thought those plays were some or our more successful ones yesterday.
Denard should start though, and be on the field for every play.
We got shut down by a good defense. I still like our chances of having a great season with Denard as our QB. The play calling was awful. If you don't call plays that show case your best player's talents, no one will succeed.
The same thing happened.
Until he can throw better and run the offense better please stop this. He's a great kid and will be a hell of a quarterback when he's ready. Until he's ready please stop. We're 6-1 and competing for our division and a chance to play in the championship game. You really thought we would be 7-0 right now?
I think you have a legit debate on your hands. Denard is Percy Harvin playing QB. Devin is 6'4 with the arm strength to make all of the trows. SImply put Devin is a QB, a kid that has every tool to be a successful QB in any scheme. Denard is not a QB, he is a hybrid wildcat QB, rb, wr and should be used like so.
I am sure you are going to tell me I am crazy and stupid and so be it, name me a team outside of Notre Dame that we have beaten worth a darn with Denard at the helm. As long as Denard is our QB we will have to watch a great athlete run around and an below average QB throw it.
Denard v teams that matter:
V MSU-37% completion percentage
V MSU-58% completion percentage 3 ints
V Iowa-96 yards passing and knocked out
v Penn State-47% completion percentage
v OSU- 44% completion percentage
Now factor in all of the screens, jump balls, and slot screens he has thrown that have turned into touchdowns that mislead how accurate he actually is.
I love Denard, great athlete, exciting to watch, but there is a reason he is never going to play QB at the next level, and even more important there is a reason that non-Rich Rod offenses wanted him at WR or S.
Time to get Devin ready.
Notre Dame is at least as good as MSU this year and was as good as MSU, Iowa, or PSU last year. But we beat them, so they don't matter.
and you think he threw the ball well v NOtre Dame this year?
he was also 200-200 last year against ND. are people forgetting that he was 200-200 twice last year. the only QB ever to do that. IN HIS FIRST YEAR AS A STARTING QB. get a clue. he's still learning.
realize that he had more yards per attempt than cousins yesterday. i wasn't there but the wind had to be a huge factor. i would bet that even our fumbled shotgun snaps were the result of the wind.
look at the progression henson made during his career. and navarre. navarre had 2 1/2 mediocre years before a solid SENIOR year. denard is still only half way thru his junior year.
Until Chad Henne, John Navarre was Michigan's all time leading passer. You don't get to be that by having 3 mediocre seasons and a good senior year.
He had three mediocre years at USC and then won the Heisman after his senior year. At the time, he was the PAC 10 career passing leader.
Stats like career yardage are more a matter of longevity than anything else. Navarre struggled heavily in 2001, and had consistency issues in 2002 (e.g., the games against Iowa, Notre Dame and Ohio State).
Denard Robinson is not Carson Palmer.
Also, Denard will not be an NFL QB like Carson Palmer and John Navarre. The comparison is not very good at all.
And both of you are missing the point of the comparison. Both guys struggled early in their career and eventually corrected their problems in order to finish the careers in a strong way.
I am suggesting that Denard can also do that. It will not make him an NFL quarterback prospect. But Denard does not need to be an NFL QB prospect in order to have a good career.
So far this year, Denard has a QB rating higher than any season Navarre ever had.
I think his point was that, besides Notre Dame, we lost to every team you just listed.
Agreed. The "fit a square peg in a round hole" experiment has failed.
I don't think I want a qb who doesn't know where the line of scrimmage is, yet
Imo that's a minor mental lapse probably because he hasn't played many meaningful snaps as the true QB and not a decoy.
had very minor consequences compared to Denard's mistakes.
a TD was called back there. i would call that pretty significant.
So we cant excuse Devin for making a mistake that would have been a td, yet we can make every excuse in the book for Denard. It was the OL, it was the wind, it was the WR. Love Denard, but the kid is never going to be a great thrower. For the comment Devin was in during mop up time, really? Did you not watch the entire game? He was in during the entire game.
I know people are going to disagree on this issue but I think it does require us to evaluate both QB's fairly.
I think both of them had bad mistakes, but Devin never had the chance to really get into a game rythm because we were always pulling him after 1-2 plays it seemed.
Denard played under center in high school. he just needs more experience
This is Denard's team. He's the #1 option at QB. I do like the combo package with Denard + Devin, though. It slowly immerses Devin in meaningful game situations to prepare for the inevitable times that Denard gets banged up and thrusts Devin into the #1 role. We sucked yesterday and still had a legit shot to tie the game in the 4th quarter. The blame cannot be put only on Denard. This was a team-wide level of suck-i-tude, coaches included. The real test of our team will come in the weeks ahead. Will assume the Big 10 fetal position of years past and get consistently pounded into oblivion? Purdue played well yesterday, so the next game will actually provide some valuable clues.
Yes, Devin should play, but not start! I am sick of so many fans being so fickle! (No pun intended) Michigan is 6-1. We wouldn't have this record without Denard, nor the National notoriety.
It is never good enough and I understand Michigan being held tothe highest standard, but I am sick of; We want Eric Hipple no Gary Danielson, no Tom Brady no Drew Henson, not we want Daunte no Dan Orlovsky?? NO! We love Sparky, we hate Sparky, we love Leyland, NO!
Our mental psyche is so fried from the last three season......
Honestly, I like the idea of Devin at QB and Denard at RB. Denard is still our best player and at RB he could still get 25-30 carries a game. I'm not sure how good a pass blocker he is though.
God forbid somebody missed your shining slice of genius.
One loss. Throwing into 35 mph wind. Fuck you. Go be a Texas fan or a Florida fan or something.
So people who have intelligent insight and are respectful get negative points but posts like there get you positive points?
It's reality. We lose one game and you're talking about pulling Denard. That's something that a shit fan would do. You want to know why it's sacrilege ? Because it's shitty.
A lot of people should put their feelings aside and really assess our team from a football standpoint. I love Denard as much as the next guy, but the dude just cant throw. Is he the best athlete on the field? Yes. But we need a guy who can complete more than 50% of his passes. MSU was trying to give that game away and we couldnt capitalize on anything. Some of that blame belongs to Borges, the OL, and lack of running back. I agree we needed to throw some screens and other short routes to get something going. Im not saying Devin should start, but we have not beaten a top big ten team yet in 2 years. Im just saying the idea of Devin starting and Denard at wr/slot is not a totally crazy idea.
what he thinks is best for the team. No player is bigger than the team, no player is more important than the team. Not even Denard.
I don't think Devin is ready. But, despite missing open recievers and not making correct reads he does show signs that he has a higher upside as a passer than Denard (albeit not runner). Devin's issues were misreads etc. But, his mechanics were sound, he squares up to his target, sets his feet, and throws a nice ball. D-Rob, continues to show the same poor mechanics after a year and a half at starter. He also makes coverage read errors (like Devin), but continues to not set his feet, throw off his back foot, open up his upper body, and makes bad throws. So, although I don't think Devin is ready yet, I do think he shows clear signs he will be a better passer. Now, does that mean he'll be a better manager of our offense. That's a tough call since D-Rob is such an electric runner. Against really tough run defenses obviously Denard has trouble. But, all in all he is still our best QB. But, unless we have a shut down defense, he's not gonna beat good run stopping defenses.
Doesn't it seem like the fastest way to get negged around here is to challenge some of MGoBoard's most cherished cows? And here I thought this was supposed to be a forum for rational discussion about Michigan.
No, one of the fastest ways to get negged around here is to bandwagon like a mlive poster on a board that's supposed to be made up of fans better than that.
God bless you. There's an element here that considers change -- even the mere suggestion of same -- a violation. These people are not smart.
What was rational about the OP? He thinks Devin should start at QB over Denard but hasn't provided any reasonable explanation as to why Michigan would be a better team with Devin starting instead of Denard.
Bad OP's generally lead to bad threads.
A good passing attack opens up the run, and we don't have a particularily good passing attack with Denard in. People keep saying that we should give Denard a chance to improve as a passer, but he's had two years to do that. Let's give Devin some time to get into a rythm and see how he does.
last season. Very competent. What is happening this year is bad coaching. Not bad coaching in the "they don't know how to coach" sense, but in the "they don't know how to play to Denard's strengths" sense.
Say what you will, but Rich Rod knew how to get passing production out of Denard.
He posted three of them, actually. This OP was one of the more calm, rational ones I've seen in the last day and a half.
You're correct in that he did make 3 points. Now whether or not they were any good is debatable.
Everything in the OP is conjecture based on IMO an irrational view of what we're trying to do on offence this year, and from someone who apparently didn't watch the game yesterday.
Is Devin maybe better suited for a pro-style offence? Yes.
Are we running a typical pro-style offence this year? No.
Did we play a good team yesterday? Yes.
Were we measurably better with Devin on the field? No. You could make the argument we were actually worse.
That's what it comes down to for me. If OP thinks Devin gives us a better chance to win then fine. He needs a more compelling argument if he wants to convince people he's right.
jack kennedy is probably a better passer than denard too. it doesn't mean he's a better QB or gives us a better chance to win.
...because I think you should give a poster the benefit of the reasonable doubt about intentions, but whooey, this is silly.
You can actually run a pro-style set, which is what this staff intends to run. The pro-style is what this staff believes will make us the most successful in the long term.
Devin has the arm strength to make all of the throws. You want to get your outside wideouts involved outside of jump balls, then Devin gives you the best chance.
Putting it into tight spots. Devin's arm strength is far superior to Denards, you want to hit some throws farther down the field, he is your guy.
Koger, we have one of the best weapons who is not used because imo our current QB can't see over the LOS, and this makes it much harder to throw over the middle.
Devin is creative enough to make plays with his feet and throws better on the run.
Denard isn't the only reason that pro-style isn't working for us. The entire offense was built around the spread, we don't have players big enough at nearly any position (OL, RB, WR) to support a pro-style offense yet.
And you really need to stop parroting the "TEs don't get any catches in the spread" meme the media has been harping on for all of our games this year. The TEs are getting plenty of action now, just like they were getting last year, and the years before.
I tend to disagree and thank you but I am intelligent enough to fomulate my own ideas without you suggesting where they come from. Rivals and Scout did a nice piece on how often the TE's in OUR offence were targeted , and it was something like 2-3 times a game.
I am not saying the TE's don't see balls thrown their way because of the spread, I am saying because Denard is 5'10 and can't see over the LOS.
Jr. Hemingway would play in any type of offense(he had osu and Miami offers). Fitzgerald Tussaint is bigger than Mike Hart. David Molk and Taylor Lewan will both be NFL linemen once they graduate.(I'm not sure where the "not big enough" meme started.) The reality of the situation is that we have not been successful with the pro set because Denard Robinson is not a pro style QB. He can't make the throws or the reads and as long as he's under center, defenses will send 8 rushers and stop any sort of running game.
If Devin was in at QB with Denard on the slot, a lot of stuff would open up for the offense. We'd actually have to commit to it in order to see the change though... Not try it for 2 random plays and then go back to the same ole stuff.,
I think the not big enough comes from the fact that they spent 3 years in RR's offense which favored faster offensive linemen. As such the strength programs they went through were probably different than what Wisconsin's linemen would go through in terms of favoring movement and lateral quickness over straight up bulk and being 300+.
Compare our offensive line to that of Wisconsin's, which builds their players for a pro type/power game. The weights of the players from MGoBlue.com and UWBadgers.com. (Note: I added Barnum since he is normally a starter)
Taylor Lewan - 302
Michael Schofield - 299
David Molk - 286
Patrick Omameh - 299
Mark Huyge - 302
Ricky Barnum - 292
18 31 29 16 38
Wisconsin's line: (forgive me if I have LG/RG or LT/RT swapped, I couldn't find who starts where)
Ricky Wagner - 320
Travis Frederick - 330
Peter Konz - 315
Kevin Zeitler - 315
Josh Oglesby - 330
You can also look at their backups where the lowest weight is their center at 305 and the highest weight is a tackle at 345.
So by this Wisconsin outweights us by 26.4 lbs. per offensive lineman. Those guys are built to be able to punish the guys across the line from you, whereas our guys are able to move quicker, especially on pulls (one area where Molk excels).
Its different ways that you can have your guys built, and right now we have spread type offensive linemen. Thus we are better at zone blocking than we are power blocking. It is just the fact that we are dealing with players built into RR's system and it takes more than one offseason weight program to change that.
You also picked the biggest OL in the B1G. I would like to see the rest of the league.
Exactly... Overall it was a good post, however, I doubt our OL is significantly smaller than Penn's , Iowa's , MSU, ect..
I picked Wisconsin because I know that they are built to run the power set and will always be built in such a way for as long as Bielema (spelling?) is there. I don't know what else each team runs and whether or not those teams are built for a spread or a power formation.
Give me some time and I will bring up the average of the starting 5 for each team as listed on their rivals depth chart and I will make a ranking so that it is statistically fair. Sorry I was trying to make a quick response.
Average weight per offensive lineman for each B1G team: (if anyone knows what each team runs and can add that in that would be appreciated)
Aside from the fact that Wisconsin's line is really fat and Indiana's is really small, that data doesn't really say much. Penn's line is 2% bigger and Iowa's is 2% smaller than ours. I doubt that difference is statistically significant. Also, the fact that MSU and Iowa have smaller lines, yet have been running a pro set for the past few years proves my point.
This finding deserves its own thread.
Well there were some small caveats in that I think one team's numbers were brought down significantly because they had a 250 lb. lineman or something like that.
I just think we are slightly undersized to run the Power that Hoke wants. Those small differences can make a huge difference, especially where you bulk up.
I guess it would be more fair to look at Michigan teams of the past to see a change. I'll go for the last pro style we had pre-RR which was 2007.
Jake Long - 313
Adam Kraus - 296
Justin Boren - 310
Alex Mitchell - 313
Mark Ortman - 297
That line averaged 305.8 and the lightest person among the backups was 292 with most everyone close to 300. I think this is the direction the coaches are trying to head back to, so that they can run the Power and I think recruiting shows some light in that:
Kyle Kalis - 305
Blake Bars - 275
Erik Magnuson - 275
Caleb Stacey - 280
Ben Braden - 319
Also if you look at possible remaining targets:
Zach Banner - 295
Jordan Diamond - 290
Joshua Garnett - 275
Now I know that weights will shift somewhat as they lose bad weight and put on good weight, but it seems that some of them can break the 300 mark. Granted, I don't know how all of this could work out, just trying to see if the information can show anything. It is all speculation now, but Hoke has said in the past he wants to return to Manball and starting in the trenches is the key to doing so.
that the pre-RR players you listed didn't run a push-blocking scheme, right? They were zone blocking, just like RR's OLs.
during the Wisconsin/Nebraska game comparing the Wisconsin OL to the Green Bay Packer OL. Wisconsin had them by a couple inches and 20 lbs across the board.
I guess the Green Bay OL is too small, huh?
LALALALA DENARD QB! DENARD QB! DENARD QB! LALALALA
They should both be on the field.
There's nothing wrong with asking this question. Yes, Denard's an amazingly likable kid who can be amazingly fun to watch, but it's not like he's the only great kid on this team.
Personally, I don't know who should start - I haven't seen enough of Devin - but I want the coaches to feel like they can do what's best for the team without having an entitled part of the fanbase scream "How dare you?"
I think debate is fine with arguments from each side; I'm just not a fan of the "you should be banned for mentioning it" crowd.
I sincerely believe in my heart of hearts that the coaches feel like they can do what's best for the team without having an entitled part of the fanbase scream "How dare you?". So this debate is just for the amusement of us fans.
That being said, I think it is a valid discussion for us to have. The OP made sincere ligitimate points. I don't agree with some of them, or rather, I think he's missed some other important points, but he does not deserve to be negged or censored because he brought this up.
the playcalling needs to be better to suit denards style of play. and how can we have a passing game when we dont have any running game at all. they just zero in on denard. that is not fair for him
When the D takes away the running game the qb needs to be able to exploit the holes in the passing game. Michigan has good receivers. Devin appears (with limited playing time as evidence) to be able to throw where he wants to, although it may or may not be the right read. Denard is like my golf game, he knows where he wants to go with the ball, but doesn't consistently get it to where he is aiming.
Borges needs to learn wtf a bubble screen is. There is more than one direction to stretch a defense and force them away from the OL
Are you freakin kidding me? The offense performed much better when Denard was taking the snaps, hands down! You forgot one important argument. Denard, who happens to be the most dynamic player in college sports, is a junior and will improve as a senior.
How are we even talking about this? Any coach with half a brain is not going to do that to your best athlete.
Thank you and I agree completely. Saying Denard isn't our best QB isn't throwing him under the bus. If you watched when Devin was at QB and Denard at WR the MSU defense was scared to death. They didn't know how to defend Denard motionion towards the football. Having him at multiple positions opens up things for everyone.
Do we not remember Percy Harvin? He was all over the place, and having a weapon like that opened up everything for all included.
I completely agree Devin has the potential to be a greater threat in the passing game. I also agree that this is exactly what is needed to help the offense be more balanced against better defenses long-term.
However... we still have no true running game outside of Denard. So until a true power running game emerges, Gardner in as the QB only works if Denard is right there beside him ready to take direct snaps, options, etc and provide the running threat. And ultimately Devin is not ready yet anyway.
This season you have to stick with Denard because he's gotten us to 6-1 and Devin could still use more time. NOW, next season, having Devin in the shotgun with Denard alongside him in the backfield is scary. You get the best of both worlds... better passing and Denard's ability to run.
Honestly, I think a situation like this is inevitable because I don't see Denard's passing improving enough with another year to rule out Devin, and I don't think 1 year is enough time to fix the OL and running game in order to not need Denard's running ability in the game at all times.
Simply put, Denard is our best overall option this year... next year I like Devin but you still can't have 1 without the other until we start to see development in other areas like the OL.
Percy Harvin winning Offensive Player of the Year as a QB, or breaking his conference's all-time total yardage record in a season as a QB.
Are you seriously trying to argue that a replacing a kid who owns Michigan (132 years of football excellence) and NCAA records AT QB with a kid who hasn't started a game is a good idea?
Learn to call plays that Denard can execute, Al. They exist.
Does anybody have any evidence to offer up other than the hype we've generated here about Devin's alleged passing ability? This small increase in passing ability does not offset the abscence of Denard's running ability. Devin may or may not be a better passer, and the fact that it's not obvious should be a red flag, but it is certain that he is not the same running threat, if hardly one at all. Denard's running ability is the only hope we've had on offense since Tate had to leave. I'm sure we could start Devin next time and get away with one, but we would all see that once Iowa rolled in that we NEED Denard's running ability to survive. We should be more worried about our offensive line play than QB play, because that's where we lost the game.
So you can't see how much stronger Devins arm is the Denards? That is something that needs to be studied and broken down?
Devin has two rushing TD's so I am pretty sure he is mobile enough to get himself out of some jams with his feet.
I agree with your observation does Devins throwing offset Denards running, well only if Denard can run. Denard had how many yards vs MSU?
This is the point, I want to see Denard play well against great teams, not average and below.
Really? How much stronger? Denard can put the ball pretty much anywhere you need it. Does he make the correct decisions under pressure? Almost exclusively no. Does he make the correct decision under ideal conditions? Certainly not enough. That's the key point. Quarterbacking is decision making, and I've seen nothing from the spring game or from Devin's play so far this year to justify taking out Denard. And I couldn't care less how mobile or immobile Devin is as a scrambler, that's not the point. The point is he is not taking that QB Iso/Draw or QB Power up the middle, he stops his feet before contact still to this day, and is not going to be a running threat for us. I'd be fine with that if he was a markedly better decision maker than Denard, but I've seen nothing to suggest it.
I will say this, I played alongside a guy name Byron Leftwhich, and I am pretty sure if I had to compare either of the two to his arm strength it would not be Denard.
If you recall Urban made several references to Denard not having a strong arm yesterday.
How can you even begin to evaluate Devin? He is brought in for situational plays. Given the chance like against NW he proved how good he can be.
There is a reason that Denard was not being recruited as a QB. I have seen enough of Denard against good teams to see he has yet to take over through the air. If he has please show me evidence.
Maybe you missed the dozen or so times he criticized the coaches for taking Denard off the field. He was pretty clear that Denard would be his QB, even if he never threw the ball at all. But hey, what does he know about college football . . . .
Denard had a higher QB rating last year than John Navarre or Chad Henne ever did in a season.
I'm not sayin'. I'm just sayin'.
I'm pretty sure just about everyone wanting to give Devin a shot a QB is also saying Denard has to be on the field as well. Almost no one is actually talking about benching Denard.
Okay, then where does Denard go? Is he going to learn the protection schemes to play runningback for us? Because god knows we're going to need a major effort from our backs to protect against Iowa, Nebraska, and Ohio State. Is he going to play slot and try to get the routes timed up with Devin in 2 weeks just so that we can run him on the jet sweep play 3 or 4 times? Or are we just going to turn him into a special formations player, where he comes in about 2 or 3 times a drive to run what we've been doing with him outside of the QB position thus far? That doesn't sound much different than benching our playmaker.
versus MSU. The data we have tells us his ability to make plays as a QB is seriously circumscribed by good, athletic defenses. So what do we do? I think that is the question we are trying to figure out.
We give up on winning vs any top 20 defense because Denard is our playmaker and we have to play him at all times regardless of what happens. This freaking fanbase reminds me of the Broncos fanbase with Tim Tebow. Some people in this blog have become bigger fans of Denard than they are of the Michigan football team.
at receiver cuts his touches down by about 85%. That's ridiculous.
Putting him at RB means teams have an extra tackler when he runs the ball compared to now when he runs the ball.
Option plays with Denard and Devin aren't as potent as with Denard and (insert current RB here).
And have you seen Devin's decision making skills? They were terrible yesterday. My God, he thought he could run for a first down on 4th and 22.
I would rather Al Borges study Spread offenses (or really just watch the second half of last nights Oregon game) so that we have more elements of an offense that takes full advantage of one of the most explosive players in college football.
And I don't want to hear any of that B.S. that spread offenses don't work. Florida and Auburn have both won national championships running pure spread offenses out of a conference, that I hate to say it, has been much tougher teams 1-6 than the Big Ten has been. Talent wins games under almost any system.
I know it's not fair, but if Hoke had hired a spread based offensive coordinator to go with good Greg at defense and this team is 8-0 right now. I like Al Borges. I think in three years we're going to be very, very happy to have him. But right now, his attempt at a hybrid system is holding us back (although running purely his system would be worse).
However, those three schools had players who were all superior passers to Denard. Tebow, Young, and Newton are also taller and stronger than Denard. Denard is a running back playing QB. Rip me for that, but that is my opinion of him.
I've been banging on this drum for a while, but I'll say it again: with a pass-only QB, you can always find someone else to run the ball. With a run-only QB, every team sells out against the run and you see a lot more results like yesterday. If we continue to insist on starting Denard, then at least acknowledge the futility of running any offense other than a purely ground based option scheme.
denard threw for over 2,500 yds last year; despite being dinged-up in every game. he also completed over 60% of his passes. and for people that say he can't play against good teams, i also call BS.
he actually had a solid game against Wisky, but no one notices because our D was pathetic. he also played ok against OSU. we were still competitive until he was knocked out right after half and tate took over.
he also had one of the best games ever against ND last year; both passing and running.
so there is evidence of him playing well against good teams. and we were a bad borges call away from tying the game in the 4Q yesterday, and that was with denard not at his best.
One loss and people are already calling for DG? It's crazy talk. It's funny how the same people saying this are the same ones who screamed DOOM if Denard left.
this is ridiculous. This happens everytime Michigan loses or struggles.
DOES ANYBODY REMEMBER GARDNER IN THE GAME?!
He did no better than Denard, if anything he did worse. Remember his game with significant gametime? Minnesota? Yeah, what were the headlines after that? Gardner was good, but NOT ready to be the starter.
Denard is the best player on our offense. Stop jumping the gun. Gardner is NOT ready and you'd be taking a top 10 national qb off the field. Insane
In what universe is that true? Denard is college football's best running back playing a position for which he has little natural aptitude.
I'd be fine with Denard. I'd be fine with Devin. I'd even be fine with seeing both of them over the course of a game. I'm not a fan, though, of alternating within a series. It just seems to knock everyone out of rhythm and make post-change plays too rushed.
I think doesn't realize that the second they try to do that, he will leave. Yes "The Team, The Team, The Team!", but do you really want to just throw away one of the most dynamic players in the nation, and it's not because he has character flaws.
I know that's not really what the OP meant, but it's people out here calling for it. Denard came here because he wants to be a QB. If that's what it takes to put the ball in his hands in a winged helmet, then let it be. Cut down on the deep passes, try more intermediate routes and see how it works.
I'd hate to see him leave, but Michigan needs a quarterback who can throw the ball effectively against good defenses. Denard can't do that. It is not a coincidence that the closest game between the two schools in the last four years came when Michigan had a QB who could throw it effectively.(Forcier) granted, he made some mistakes in that game, but he still was effective enough to make MSU pay.
good defenses can shut down good offenses and/or QBs. ask peyton manning how well he did against Fla or NEB.
I'm not advocating for taking Denard out from the QB position, but I think you're wrong.
Denard is a junior and has had ample chances to prove his worth as a QB. If the coaching staff thinks its better for the team to go in another direction why is that such a HUGE problem? B/c the fan-base and ESPN are in love with Denard? My guess is Denard would accept the role he is given and work to win games as a team player, judging by his character.
If you're right and he took off as soon as the job was taken from him, screw him. I don't see why people think the coaching staff should sacrifice team success to keep the ESPN hype machine in Michigan around one player.
I'm not saying you don't switch him so ESPN can hype the team up every week (if we win they will do that becuase this is Michigan after all).
It's hard to explain how I feel about the situation because I went to school with Devin, so of course I would love to see him succeed as quickly as possible. I just don't think you throw away your best player unless he shows something character-wise that is something a player at Michigan shouldn't do. I'm not a QB expert, but I think the staff should (I would hope) know what routes Denard can hit on a consistent basis. I think if they do that we might see the improvement we had expected going into the year.
YOu think Denard will transfer with 1 year left of eligibility left? I think that is pretty crazy talk in its self.
He can still be a QB, do what he does now just situationally. He is not MIke Vick, he is Precy Harvin playing QB. He is not a top 10 QB, he is the top rushing QB with a below average arm. That doesn't compute into a top 10 quarterback.
Int yesterday was V. Smiths fault. So stop pinning that on Denard, and from what I saw yesterday Devin is no where near ready to play more than he already does. Watching him run around like he was playing pop Warner football should be enough evidence that he just isn't ready. He seemed lost.
That being said... Be back in two weeks when I pray that sanity has been restored here.
has returned to glory.
Devin's not ready yet. His situational awareness is lacking (running around on that final 4th down, throwing beyond the LOS, not noticing the playclock running down, etc). His knowledge of the offense seems to be behind Denards (missing wide open Hopkins), and all in all, his passing wasn't that much better than Denards.
Devin throws a pretty ball. He has good size. Ideally he's a great QB. But Devin and Denard are still both learning the system and both have a ways to go. Denard gives you the home run threat on every play. That is our best chance.
Later today I'm going to try to suffer through a re-watch of the game but as of now I can't believe how many people are bitching about the play calling, particularly the first half. No amount of genius playcalling is going to overcome Denard's inability to read a defense, pick up a blitz, poor choices/throws and general lack of command of an offense that requires more than 2 choices. He can't seem to see the entire field nor does he seem to have the ability to slow the game down when under pressure. Where were the screens? How do you call a screen with a QB who has neither the patience or size/touch/composure to throw over oncoming defenders?
I have no idea if Denard can get better. What I do think though is that Borges has to continue to develop an offense around his vision, not Denard's limitations. He has to be able to back a defense off the line with some simple completions and reads, he has to be able to hit a receiver who gets a step on his defender, he has to be able to know when to run when a pass play breaks down, he has to be able to keep his composure and execute. If DG is the guy who can grow and competently execute that system, then so be it.
Fuck anyone who says Denard shouldn't be the QB.
Fuck them straight in the ear.
The grass is always greener.
You could play for Dantonio.
These are just opinions between fans. There is no need to go William Gholston on those you disagree with.
All in good fun, my friend.
But, seriously, fuck em. That's an opinion between fans.
I'm all out of classy responses to this tired premise.
Yeah cause when I go to a message board I expect CLASS and JBE is punching people and twisting their necks. The horror.
You're forgetting that. He made poor decisions, didn't hit his throws well either and doesn't run as well as Denard.
He's going to be good, but the kid is still really green.
Denard had a horrible day, but like others have said, this is against the best front 7--and arguably best defense--we're currently scheduled to face all year.
The backup qb is always a fan favorite if a team has some offense struggles.
Why not have Gardner in to throw and Denard at running back, he could be Barry Sanders like
you have to think about the mental impact to denard ...while I don't know if he would necessarily transferI think doing so would have a demoralizing impact. the risk is that you would negatively impact denards play and that gardner would prove to be not ready...after considering the risks I think that the coaches are taking the most prudent approach.
While I personally don't think it's time for Gardner to be the first-string QB, people here need to be able to discuss things without constantly flying off the handle, making ad hominem attacks and such.
I agree, Denard should have done much better with no running game to support him, a full on blitz which saw him running for his figurative life (maybe literal life given MSU thuggery). Also, obviously Denard's fault that he didn't properly mind meld Smith into making the right adjustment on the int.
Denard failed to make the quick reads against the blitz and failed to scramble, his best attribute, when the lanes were there. I don't know that DG is the answer, but putting Denard at tailback would certainly solve our other big problem in the backfield. And before you say that Denard couldn't handle the beating, our it's the lines fault the RB's don't gain yards. Denard already, before yesterday, runs the ball 20-25 times a game and he already runs the power play for good yards with the same line.
I love Denard, but it is not the winds fault when you overthrow your receivers by 10 yards...in Evanston.
That puts our best 11 on the field and I think Devin would be very effective running the zone read with Denard...it would open up the playbook. Can you imagine a screen to Denard?
Well, it comes down to which QB Hoke thinks has the higher ceiling. If it's Devin, then it's worth some growing-pains to get him there.
First, Michigan had only 67 attempts offensively on Saturday to get something done.
It was pretty balanced too: 36 rushing and 31 passing.
Borges did what he could to keep MSU's defense honest by throwing more. Not a bad idea given the Spartans shitty secondary.
I don't really care about all this unnecessary roughness stuff. That just sounds like a bunch of cry-babies who don't get their way. This is football, not golf. Besides, I'm sure the Big Ten and upcoming opponents of MSU will do their part to make sure this doesn't happen anymore. MSU can play like that if they want, but they should cry when players have to sit out against Wisconsin next week.
Narduzzi had MSU ready to play and they recruited talented players over the last few years. Time to recognize that fact.
Lastly, Michigan had 250 yards of total offense on Saturday. Denard personally contributed to 165 of those yards gained. Nobody else stepped up. Receivers dropped passes and the running backs did nothing special to contribute.
If you think Denard Robinson should be sat down in favor of Devin Gardner, who contributed only 30 positive yards in 13 attempts, then I think you need to be admitted to a mental institution.
Sorry, but there's nothing in the sample of Michigan's measly 67 offensive attempts that supports your argument.
Granted fans don't have enough evidence to say Gardner should play, but Denard has been making people cringe with his passes for awhile now. The loss just opened the door for people to say what they have been thinking. People tend to stay quiet after a win, although some people have touched on it.
the bye week, and install Navy's triple option.
The fourth and one play call was not a bad one i seem to remember us succeding with that call. It was just a very good defensive call by state
I don't know. I do know we aren't going to win a lot of big ten games with Denard playing QB.
My take? Try it out, at least. We have a bye week, why not spend it by letting Devin get used to the first teamers and let Denard try out RB? If it doesn't work against Purdue, we can go back to Denard at QB, and we can still walk away with a win.
I, like a lot of others aroud here, had a knee jerk downvote reaction to this post, but give it some thought. Devin is the better passer at this point, and Denard at RB would be DEADLY! Can you imagine Devin & Denard in the backfield at the same time, with 4 WRs? How the hell do you defend that?
Edit: Just think of all the stuff you could do with a RB like that! You could run pitch plays with a pass option, and have by far the most deadly wildcat package. The list goes on...
Also, I know true dual threat QBs open up the pass, but MSU showed that you can easily beat a Denard led offense by stacking the box and going 1 on 1 with all the WRs, knowing that he cant beat you with his arm. I think having a better passer in at QB would open up the run, which would in turn help the pass, etc etc.
Who is saying bench Denard? Everyone is saying move him around. He can play multiple positions. Seriously did no one on here watch Percy Harvin play? Kid ran the wildcat at QB, threw it a few times, was a runningback, and played wideout. Why could we not use Denard like that? Why would we sit Denard Robinson on the bench? There are still ways to get him the football 20 times a game not at QB.
Yes Denard made up most of our total offense, that's because the offense is made to work around his skills.
If your intent is to not start a shit storm of rage, then you should stick to posts about the RichRod era. We like those.
I think it's probably appropriate to consider the whole picture when talking about the game yesterday. There was a hugely significant wind that made it tough to pass as well as some questionable playcalling in terms of pass vs. run given the circumstances. Also, M kept giving a play-action fake that wound up getting Denard immediate pressure because MSU didn't have to respect the fake. Couple that with the lack of a bubble screen, mind boggling at this point, no draws or screens, (Unfortunately I don't think the middle screen is a good option at this point given Denard's accuracy issues, perhaps the play to Koger they showed against NW) it's hard to completely fault Denard.
Obviously he will never be a great passer. I don't know many passers who are great when faced with constant pressure and high winds. I get as pissed as anyone when he air mails throws, but I'm not ready to give up on him at QB and toss a rs freshman out there. Denard was a 1st team All-American last year. I think they just need to keep working on some easier throws and run the damn ball more, (O-line issues aside, agree with Brian that zone blocking seems to be their forte, remember when Omameh was supposed to be the next great lineman?). All these things aside, they need to find a running back. I like Fitz but he has yet to break a tackle on the second level. I like V. Smith blocking and catching passes and occasionally mixing in the run. However, you see a lot of teams with backs who can get to the second level and turn 4 into 11 or 14. M lacks that. I'd try Rawls. Mainly because I thought, line problems aside, Fitz and Smith both struggled breaking gains against NW. You have to give someone else a chance, and we all know Shaw's bounce game. Lond post aside, keep Denard, run more, shorten throws, zone block, Rawls. It's easier to coach from my computer.
It's Denard's first year learning the new offense. It's also probably the first time anyone ever bothered to coach him on his technique, timing, throwing mechanics and footwork.
If Gardner had it all in place in terms of these things, then he would be the starter already. Both quarterbacks are still learning to execute this offense.
But it's a major strategic mistake anyway to put the game all on one player. See Tate Forcier in 2009 Michigan team. Michigan needs playmakers all around, especially in the running game. Michigan's running backs have not done enough to help this offense and release the pressure off Denard.
its one thing learning the offense, but learning how to pass is different. Denard is not a qb. he's been playing qb since he was probably 10 years old, and still can't make a simple pass to a moving Target besides slants. Denard is still a great football player, but sorry, a qb has to be able to make the throws. like I said b4 opponents laugh and joke about Denard when he throws. sure he threw for a lot of yards against northwestern, but who cant? I'm sure by the end of the season the coaches will insert Devin for the better of the team. you can already see, they r doing it slowly. go blue!
Really was there a need to bring up anyone coaches from last year? Lets state a simple fact right now...the Qb coach from last year had Denard completing passes at a 63% clip.....that is not even close this year.
With Denard, the defense can move up to contain him and stop the run.
Once the run is stopped, Denard can't pass worth beans against good defenses.
His lack of passing skills is going to continue to cost our team wins against good defenses.
Denard has demonstarted he won't adjust to the mechanics he must adapt to be a better passer.
I would not put Denard in as a back or receiver. I would sit him on the bench as the best back-up quarterback available.
I think Devin's passing skills will back the defenses off, taking pressure off our offensive line, and let the running backs have better lanes.
You would put our only playmaker on the bench?!!...hmmmm
DG will be a great QB for us down the road, but until we can team him with an effective running game, it won't work out. At least Denard self-generates something of a running game.
Until we have an effective running game, it won't matter if Tom Brady is the starter.
have you heard of passing to set up the run?
Yeah I think its time honestly. Denard could be just like a Dexter Mcluster type player. He could be way better in my opinion doing so many different things offensively and even defensively... Denard off the edge like a CB on a blitz to hurry the QB, Lol. Anything is possible with a guy like Denard. I think its time to make the change to maximize the teams potential for the year, Denards, and Devins.
I am sure this has been mention in this thread. I honestly haven't read the entire thing, but Devin needs his share of coaching up as well.But as someone who was at the game,he missed a guy streaking down the middle of the field with nobody within 15 yards of him twice. I am not sure Devin is the magic wand that everyone expects him to be quite yet.
Yes, Denard has gotten M to 6-1. So that apparently means he should continue to take virtually all the snaps at QB for the rest of the season. Fine. After Purdue, when M will be 7-1, M faces four teams that at least know how to play some semblance of defense. The DCs of those teams will have studied the MSU game film. They too will cram 8–9 in the box and dare Denard to beat them with his arm which, given his track record thus far, he will not be able to do.
The result will be 2010 all over again --- INTs, a pick 6 or two, defense on the field too long and too often, zero rushing attack, Denard knocked out of games sometime in the early fourth quarter, and an inexperienced Gardner taking his place. M beats either Illinois or Iowa, loses to Nebraska and Ohio, and ends up 8-4 rather than last year’s 7-5 (before the bowl game). Progress of a sort, maybe.
As presently configured, this one-dimensional offense has little chance of putting up enough points to defeat a good D. The time has come to consider seriously a change in the offensive game plan that puts Devin and Denard on the field almost all the time, with Devin doing most of the throwing and Denard doing the receiving and running. The result might not be better than 8-4, but it least such a configuration has the possibility of improving on that record, whereas the current configuration does not.
Beating Purdue is not a given. IF we are way ahead then we can experiment. Let's worry about winning it first.
Our running backs don't do a whole lot. Pulling Denard essentially means quitting running unless you want both of our non freshman scholarship QB's constantly taking hits. Also, Devin was not exactly stellar yesterday.
I find this whole foofaraw amusing and ridiculous, but not because it somehow shouldn't be discussed.
Here's what's amusing and ridiculous: doesn't it seem like this is the sort of conversation Hoke and Borges probably had several times in the spring? I mean, have some humility. And what they concluded is that Denard should learn Borges's pro-style offense, which they to some degree tried to implement for Western and ND, and to some degree have scrapped in favor of Borges-Denard fusion.
So think about it: when they thought they were going to implement the mostly pro-style offense, they decided Denard was better at it. Now that they have moved to elements of the spread n' shred attack, they have still decided Denard is better. Why exactly do we think Devin would be better at the hybrid when the coaches have already decided that he isn't even better to run the pro-style?
My view: if Denard > Devin at the pro-style and Denard is having trouble with the pro-style elements of the offense, then the offense should be tailored even more to Denard's strengths. Which would involve the outside zone read and the bubble screen, I think. I mean, Cousins didn't exactly set the world on fire yesterday, but he had a competent running attack to rely on. I think Borges needs to tweak the running game and the passing game to give Denard some easier throws that he has demonstrated he can make.
i cringe every time denard goes under center. we have consitently moved the ball when we reverted back to spread-style.
Quickest way to negative points? Mention that you don't think Denard is a quality option at QB.
how could the big 10 player of the year (at QB) possibly be a quality QB?
Denard is an exceptional athlete but a good/great QB he is not. IMO, he is actually throwing the ball worse than last year, so he's regressing. He doesn't play well under center. His ball fakes on passes are nonexistent. And as the announcers pointed out 10x yesterday, he doesn't plant his foot when he throws, throwing so high it makes Henne's throws look almost catchable.
Almost all gifted athletes can play QB. But can they make the throws that need to be made to win a championship? Can they read blitzes and coverages that need to be made to win a championship? At this stage and after 20 games as a starter, Denard has proven he can't do the things he needs to do to win a championship. Is it all him? No. But the QB position is the most important position on the field. He will continue on at QB, I have no doubt, but his mistakes will hurt the team and cause a few more losses when he's in a winable games.
For this reason, I think Devin should be our QB. For the type of offense Hoke and Borges want to run, he is the answer. And in 2 years, Morris even more so. Use Denard as a wideout, flanker, RB, but scratch the QB position. He'll never win against the tough teams in the B1G the day he plays now.
Denard is obviously the best RB on this team.
Devin is a more accurate passer, this was confirmed by Hoke yesterday. Sure, Devin may not have shown this in game but consider how much more experience with reads and how much more practice Denard has with the extra year as a college QB and approaching his eigth likely start as a second year starter. Devin can also run the ball, he may not be bottled lightning but he's a good mobile spread QB.
As Urban Meyer said, if Devin is one of the best 11 players on the field then they need to get him out there. Obviously Devin is good enough that the coaching staff feels he needs to be out there as much as he was yesterday (quite a lot for a backup QB with an uninjured starting QB).
Denard can take 20-25 carries (his valued asset and we dont need to worry about him getting too banged up to throw), handle blocks (yes, he's had some good ones), throw in some trick plays, and allow our better passer to handle the passing duties. this still plays to the team strengths because Devin was recruited to run the spread.
We are in the middle of a spread/pro style hybrid year. Why not have our highly rated more accurate yet still athletic QB in at QB and put the best RB in as an actual RB.
I was ready to send you to Bolivia when I read the title. But after reading the post, while I disagree with your conclusion, you made your case reasonably and without malice. Well done.
Brian doesn't have to go far for TWIS material this week.
There's no reason Denard can't be used all around the field. Can someone also explain to me why we didn't run one screen yesterday?
As I see it, Denard lacks the patience and timing skills that a screen play requires from the QB.
I'm a bit tired of our stupid spread offense being shut down against every single good defense we've played over the last 3.5 years. Against what good defense has it actually done well? We put up 500 yards on crap teams and Notre Dame and then get reamed against any big ten team with a pulse
My guess is that Saturday wasn't an anomaly, that as the season goes on we'll start to see more of a mix of the two, both because Denard won't be quite as healthy and Hoke has more than hinted DG is a better thrower. This is like Ohio a few years back, where Pryor split time as he developed and whatever-his-name-was appeared to be a much better thrower. This may not be a bad thing, because it gives teams more to think about when planning for us. But, I think the play where DG missed the wide-open Hopkins shows that he still isn't necessarily ready for the starting gig on his own.
Next fall is going to be a real interesting situation. Just think though, at least now we are debating DG vs. Denard instead of Threet vs. Sheridan. Remember 2008...or don't...
DG isn't ready. He has a decent arm, but he doesn't see the whole field. There were at least two throws yesterday that he made to covered receivers when there was someone else wide open.
This thread is fucking stupid. Was it the stepping 3 yds over the line of scrimmage Before throwing the ball or the missing a wide open roundtree for a Td that made you post this. Denard didn't play well yesterday. But he's the mother fucking reigning B10 offensive player of the year. What have you seen that says that DG should start.
but the coaches are obviously grooming him,
Bingo. It really doesn't matter one bit what we think or say about this issue. Only Hoke's opinion has weight.
The coaches obviously can't come out and say it, but their actions speak louder than words. They know they want Gardener as QB. They are preparing him for the transition and it would also appear that they are preparing Denard for his future as a faster Desmond at the same time.
Speaking of which, I am sure Desmond could have done a decent job as QB back in the day (he was the most athletic guy on the team) but the team was better with him as WR & kick returner.
I would rather see one more W in our W/L column rather than having a B1G player of the year in my team. At this point, Denard had enough opportunities to prove himself at QB. Coaches know that, which is why they let Devin take snaps.
I didn't read the OP, or any comments, but want to say when you have a player that can take it to the house on any play, he needs to be on the field.
With the huge number of votes on this thread, I think someone should create a survey and determine how the MGoCommunity feels about this
Denard is a terrible Quarterback against decent defenses. Were a running team with an offensive line that can't run block. The only thing that is going to make this offense go is a passing game. Denard will not give us that. Devin may be able to. We have to at least try him out.
Anyone that complains about Devin looking lost doesn't know what they're talking about. He has barely gotten any playing time this year. Of course he's going to look lost. Purdue is the perfect opportunity to give him some experience and work the kinks out without too much threat of losing.
Anyone that says we have no running game without Denard doesn't know what they're talking about. No one knows what our running game could look like if we were to open up the opposing defense by being able to pass the ball. Who knows what our RBs could do when the opposing defense doesn't have 9 players in the box. Also, Devin can run the ball too. Is he as good as Denard? Obviously not. But with his passing game he doesn't have to be.
Bottom line: I'd like to see a QB that actually has the chance to complete a 3rd and long against a solid defense.
Devin should at least get complete drives and not just a play here and there.
everybody says Denard doesn't have running backs to help him out. I think a lot of this is because they sell out to stop the run with Denard at QB. I think with Devin in Fitz would have more room to run. I think a lot of this is Denards height. He can't throw over a 8 man blitz and complete it accurately. Devin can.
Do any of you seriously think that Gardner is not going to struggle for the same reasons that Tate and Denard did? Or like Henne and Navarre did in their first two years as starters?
After reading through most of the thread I will say that there are good arguements on both sides and then a lot of trash in the middle.
I will admit that I am concerned with Denard's mechanics. He has the terrible tendancy to make wtf were you thinking throws...HOWEVA I still think he gives us the best chance of winning at this point in time.
I like what I see out of Devin but I do think this topic is a bit premature. I think he will be a very very good qb if not a great one down the road, but I think a lot of you are forgetting how very few underclassmen QBs are succesful. I do not think subbing him in will eliminate the wtf throws be any stretch of the imagination.
Look, I am irrationaly upset just like many of you that we lost to State...again...but we had a legitimate shot at winning that ballgame until the pick six. This years team is not the same as last years and I think we still end up with a succesful season with Denard running the offense.
Lastly, I don't think Denard has reached his ceiling as a passer. Can any of you remember what Troy Smith looked like as a QB prior to his Hiesman winning senior year? His passing was anything but pretty. We are talking about a 21 year old kid here. Something clicks for lots of players as they become seniors. Having a junior or younger stud qb is a rarity, although we sometimes don't act like it.
Just to add on to my previous point, I simply can't see this offense being effective from here on out with Denard at QB (the game against Purdue is an exception). Teams will stack 8 men in the box, blitz almost every play, and play bump and run man coverage on our recievers. This defense will always work unless you have a QB who can throw well, and because of that our best option is Devin. Devin + Denard in the backfield would be one hell of a combination, and on pass plays you could have Denard line up at WR and bring in Vincent for pass blocking. All in all, I think our offense can stay as effective as it was early in the year if we move Denard and start Devin, but if we stay the course we are going to be shut down. I would love to be proven wrong, but that's the way I see it right now.
We are 6-1. Everyone should calm down. Denard didn't look good yesterday, but we are still 6-1. I like seeing devin out there, but Denard has to be out there too, and I don't understand why Denard doesn't run some patterns and see Devin chuck it up to him. Also the play calling needs to be a lot better, yesterday was just very frustrating watch on all levels.
One loss and we're ready to turn on Denard? Shame on you. His first year in a new system with a new coach. Good lord.....
Please tell me you predicted 10-2 this season so I can laugh at you.
My 2 cents: If Denard is injured, start Gardner, otherwise it's Denard all the way.
A lot of posters are saying we need our best player on the field. But that's not mutually exclusive with Gardner at quarterback. Why is Denard at RB such a weird idea? Isn't he our best runner?
I think it's something worth trying and worked at least once against MSU.
Denard would still get most of the touches, 25-30 a game, and even on a few plays could do a fake run/pass, but I think Devin has the better arm and should be our primary throwing option.
Only problem I forsee is if Denard can't pass block ( I have no idea whether he can) but in that case we can pair him up with a more experienced RB to pass block?
I was being genuine... could you at least explain why you think that doesn't make sense?
I don't know what he's talking about either, you make a good point. As far as pass blocking goes, I would think that with 2 weeks of practice you could become at least OK at cut blocking blitzers, so we would probably be fine on most downs. On obvious passing downs, we could sub in our 3rd down back for pass protection, and move Denard out to WR. This is extra effective because Denard at WR demands a safety over the top, so he opens up the other side of the field. You could reasonably have him run fly routes every 3rd and long and that would help your passing game (I doubt he's going to be able to run many routes at first).
My arguemnt to the "we are 6-1". We were 5-0 with him last year, then we hit this stretch and poof we are 2-7. Am I saying we are that same team? No, but Denard is that same passer.
Troy Smith comparison is silly. Troy was 6-6'1, 215, much stronger arm. Want proof, this kid played QB in the NFL. Denard will never be a QB in the NFL, why? He can't make the throws.
No one is turning on Denard, we are calling a spade a spade. Denard is an amazing athlete who should be used in multiple ways. He should touch the ball at minimum 20 times a game, but a QB he is not.
If he is our best option at QB, stick with the kid. I like what I have seen from Devin so far in limited time.
That was my point. Troy Smith couldn't make the throws for most of his career either. I will grant you he was more polished in an apples to apples than Denard is right now but he also was in the same system every year.
My arguement was that Smith made a big leap his senior year in his overall passing effectiveness and it is very plausible that Denard could do the same.
I think one of the big differences with Smith vs Denard is the talent Smith had around him. He had a solid oline, a stud college running back and some good receivers. UM might not have a single skill position player this year that would have started for OSU in 2005 or 2006.
Teams weren't keying their entire defense around Smith because they knew they could get gashed by OSU's running backs or get beaten deep by OSU's wr's. The better defenses that UM plays aren't going to be very concerned about UM's running backs or their receivers beating them deep. When UM's receivers beat someone deep, it's usually because they win the jump ball - not because the wr's have blazing speed and blew by the corner.
If you look at OSU's running stats from 2006, it was so centered on the running backs that Smith was only running the ball a few times a game. UM doesn't have that luxury.
I forgot about Troy Smith's epic pro QB career, where he won multiple titles and was an All-Pro. I thought he was a career backup with a 8-to-5 TD/INT ratio, 50% passing rate, and 4-4 record as a starter.
Denard probably won't be a QB in the pros, but let's not act like all "pro-style" or protypical QBs (which Devin is not either) are destined for the NFL.
Looking into the crystal ball, which is neither Waterford nor particularly clean, I foresee that the next two weeks will be spent trying to get Denard's passing game to at least a serviceable level AND maybe stepping on the gas when it comes to Gardner's development too.
It seems like they are coming to that point of decision where they either maintain the current pace of transition, which involves a lot more passing, something which is not our starter's forte obviously, or they start experimenting with hybrid offenses which can still play to his strengths, which we've seen to a certain degree.
As of today, Robinson has completed 76of 141, which is good for a 53.9% completion rate. He has 8.89 YPA, slightly better than last year, and 11 TDs, so he's on track to exceed last year's 18 TDs.
The startling ones perhaps - 5 sack already, compared to 7 all of last year, and 10 INTs, compared to 11 all of last year. I blame the scheme change in large part, for he is not in his element in many of these plays. Not his fault. In reality, Borges is still trying to figure out what exactly he has here - you can see it in the playcalling.
As for Gardner, you probably will see him a little more - clearly, they at least want him in on this, and the plans seem to be for him to take the reins in the future. They are just beginning to get data on him, if you will, but now would be about the time he would start showing up in games, but not as the starter. He clearly needs many more reps than what he is getting - maybe they start to ease him up to that level in the next two weeks, but I would bet money that Robinson starts against Purdue all the same, provided he is healthy.
Stafford sucks. Start Drew Stanton!
you are dumb. how does everyone turn in denard for losing one freakin game? Direct your fury at borges.
I have absolutely no idea why people think because Denard struggled passing the ball for one game that he should be replaced by a guy with extremely limited experience and so-so performance so far when he does play. Do people really not think that, given weeks to prepare for Devin, that a very good defense like MSU's couldn't figure out how to stop him? This is what drives me crazy - UM loses one freaking game and people are looking to blame somebody and have "real" change. Denard is one of the best players in CFB, and just because he had a bad game (and let's be fair, the whole offense had a bad game), we are looking to boot him to the curb. I get it - you hate losing, especially to state. But if you honestly think that Devin is a better QB right now, you are basing it on hype, recruiting rankings, and a "sense" that the guy you haven't see mess up is better than the guy you did. I think Devin will be a very good QB for this team, but I have seen or heard nothing to change the opinion that he is still extremely raw as a QB and would struggle mightily in a full-game situation.
I am basing it on 2 years of experience now. The stats have alredy been compiled, if you are not Notre Dame Denard in two years has not been very good. Period.
If that changes then great, but history suggests no.
What are you even talking about? The stats are compiled, so whatever? Apparently the stats that showed Denard throwing for 239 yards and 2 TDs against Wiscy, 250 and 2TDs against Miss St., 305 yards against Illinois, all last year don't count? Yes, he had a bad game. It happens. But what did Devin do last year? Not much. What has he done this year? Not much. And yes, I do realize that Devin has had limited opportunities. But when given chances, he has shown flashes of brilliance coupled with poor decision making and inexperience. Now, if Devin improves and beats out Denard in a QB competition this summer, then so be it. But throwing in Devin just for the sake of change isn't going to fix anything, and will probably only lead to more growing pains for the rest of the team. Last time I checked, UM is 6-1 with a tough loss and winnable games coming up. Let's save the overreaction and myopic decisions to when the team has legitimate concerns.
In the last 3 years, we started new QBs each of those years. How'd that work out?
Your first point is that Denard is spread QB. So what? Borges has shown he can call zone reads, and other spread plays. If the coaches didn't think they could coach the spread they would have made Devin the starter last Sprign.
Your second point is that we shouldn't delay the inevitable. Why not? Lots of college teams have success with QBs who may have a great deal of pro potential. Just because Devin may have the brighter future as a QB 3 years from now doesn't mean he has a brighter present. Denard has had most the snaps in Spring and Fall practice. He knows the offense. In the MSU game, Devin did not look dominant in the chances he got.
Finally, you claim that this offense has done nothing against a good B10 defense in two years. That's not the game. Last year, OSU, Iowa, PSU, Wisconsin and Illinois were in the top 5 in the B10. While I agree that OSU and to a lesser extent PSU shut us down, that wasn't true of the other three (yes, we lost to Wisconin and Iowa but we put up points and moved the ball).
Denard beat Notre Dame this year (and last) single-handedly. He's the only QB in the prior 3 years to lead us to a bowl game. Yes, his passing is a problem, but I'd suggest we spend the next two weeks figuring what he can do in that part of the game rather than transitioning to our 4th new QB in four years.
Player 1 is John Navarre (SR year) and Player 2 is Chad Henne (JR year) (I know Tom Brady had a stinker as well, but I couldn't find the stats).
My point is that it happens. Denard is never going to be the passer of Navarre, Henne, or Brady, but none of them were as dynamic an offensive playmaker as Denard either. Gusy have bad games, and while he has regressed a bit as a passer, sometimes guys just have bad games. But if UM could have run the ball with their RBs, then maybe Denard could have calmed down a bit and they could have moved the ball more effectively. So before we bench Denard and insert Devin, let's realize that the TEAM won all of those games to start the season, and the TEAM lost this last game.
You guys are giving Gardner the Fred Jackson treatment. Denard had a bad game but Gardner is not amazing yet. He will start once he gets better. Then he will be like Tom Brady, but faster, and stronger.
Devin is gonna be a good QB at Michigan, but just think of all that Denard has done for Michigan. He's the ONLY reason we went to a bowl game last year and he's the reason we came back and beat Notre Dame this year, not to mention his 2nd half performance against Northwestern. Denard might not have the best arm, but he makes plays. Defenses have to prepare for his running and passing skills which adds a lot for any opposing defense to plan for. Devin is a good QB, but I like what Denard brings to the table
No, there's not much evidence re Devin's
passing skill. That's for the simple reason that Denard has taken virtually all the snaps. But Devin is a pass-first QB and a highly regarded one. He might offer a more diverse skillset. Good defenses will stop Denard because he's one-dimensional. It's obvious.
And suggested this last December. Start Devin. I can sum up why in 6 words:
I just don't get how people completely dismiss the fact that Denard is in a different offense and has different expectations from the coaches. We knew that there would be growing pains, and frankly there have been far fewer than expected. I still believe that Denard gives us the best chance to win week in and week out based on his big play potential and elusiveness. MSU's defense is great. They completely confused Denard and outcoached our coaches. Devin has serious potential, but the players believe in and trust Denard. I don't think you mess with that right now.
No one is "hacking your account." Your MGoPoints aren't actually worth anything on the black market.
It's a new rule: call someone a f*cker, or tell them to go f*ck themselves, you get to spend some time sharing the wonders of the Disney Princesses.
It's a new rule: call someone a f*cker, or tell them to go f*ck themselves, you get to spend some time sharing the wonders of the Disney Princesses.
You can always just ask to have an entertaining signature line added for you.
Mine better have Mulan, too.
And what's up with the fancy font in this thread?
It is not fair to Denard to change the OC & schemes, etc., and expect him to master it all this year. I believe that Borges is correct when he says, in so many words, "Calm down. I've done this before. Denard will have passing down by the end of the season."
Now, I believe that Borges is correct, and that Denard will be lights out next year, both passing and running.
HOWEVER . . . hedging bets a bit, I believe that Spring Ball & Fall Practice will be the time to truly assess whether Denard is done throwing off his back foot or not, and whether he has figured out when to take off instead of being stubborn. If, by the end of the season, and Spring Ball, and Fall Practice, Borges sees that Denard has reached his ceiling and his limitations, well, then make the change. but we're not at that point. I'd also like to see how the team reacts to this loss and does in November before making this kind of change.
he shouldn't. Just look at the missed touchdown when Hopkins was running up the field WIDE OPEN.
I agree with the "denard does not fit the offense". but lets not jump the gun just yet. if we lose to another B1G opponent, and its from denards lack of ability to run the offense with efficiency. then we should think about moving to different sets with devin as a primary QB. denard is a great athlete and should be on the field at all times. we all know he will NOT go to the NFL for QB. maybe returner or slot. He has one more year. after that devin will be more ready for the offense and we will acually have a stellar defense to back him up. and lets not forget about Shane Morris. We have to use devin while we can. We might redshirt morris because devin will be a senior when shane is a Frosh. with that being said it is a good idea for devin to get more reps. but lets not get antsy because Drob has not been producing in the pass game.
That we have enough offensive onfield and coaching talent to figure out a way to make this work effectively but they just haven't been able to do so. Giving the reigns to devin is not the answer nut getting him in the mix in a way that isn't so disruptive to the flow of the offense could be. Now if we could just develop some flow in our offense we could potentially test out this theory.
the Op and the posts, I think the OP is serious. Now I laugh. Everyone has the right to his/her opinion and it does not matter if it is right or wrong.
We are in the hunt for the B1G title. If it aint broke, dont fix it.