Devin should start at QB

Submitted by BILG on

I know this is sacriledge in these parts, but I will go forth anyhow.  An analysis of why we need a qb change.  This is not out of panic mode as many will attest, but instead from watching our offense struggle the past two years whenever facing a top 25 defense that stacks the box.

1) Denard is not a qb unless he is in a spread option attack

Denard is an amazing athlete that needs to be on the field all the time.  I totally agree with that.  He is also a great kid and leader on this team.  However, trying to run a hybrid offense with him simply won't work.  As a drop back passer he does not look the part.  You can say, "new system", "needs time", etc, but nobody can deny that Devin look the part as a passer.  Sure he is not there yet, but he stands in and throws bullets....not always to the right man yet unfortunately.  Some of Denard's thows are just mind boggling punt looking ducks.  He is not that accurate and has to think about his footwork.  There is  reason other schools did not recruit him as a qb.  Even in RRs system we struggled against good d-lines because if you make an offense one dimensional (in our case force Denard to throw), then you are predictable and play into the defense's hands.  I love Denard and he should still be in on every play on offense, and we need to run a bunch of plays where he is the centerpiece, but if the run is being taken away we need our most accurate passer under center.  He is not that guy...even Coach Hoke said so yesterday.

2)  Don't delay the inevitable

Denard will not be a qb in the NFL and it is very likely Devin would start over him next year.  Devin has already closed ground on him in terms of playing time and it is clear as we transition back to a more pro-style balanced attack that Gardner fits the mold.  Denard is not Michael Vick....Vick is taller and was always more accurate, even as a freshman in college.  It is a disservice to Denard to not train him for his future in the NFL as a slot man / return man.  It is also a disservice to Gardener to not have him get the qb training under center he deserves.  Gardner plays a very similar game as one Vince Young....except he has much better mechanics and accuracy.  Also, the Shane Morris era is around the corner, and Devin probably should get 2-3 full years as starter befor Shane takes over in his sophomore year.  Let the natural qb play qb, and let the most athletic player on our team stand next to him as a qb/rb/wr hybrid in the backfield. 

3)  Spread has not worked against one good Big 10 defense in two years

For those of you who wish to cry heresy, "how could I throw such a great kid under the bus" etc, please realize none of this is personal.  It's about the team.  I love Denard, and he needs to be on the field.  This is just a realistic assessment of his abilities and what we have seen the past couple years.  As a passer, his deep throws are jump balls, he struggles to set his feet, and he is innacurrate on out patterns.  His best throw are laser slant throws, but he often makes the wrong reads on blitzes, especially on obvious passing downs.  Gardner on the other hand, does not have happy feet, looks the part of a division 1 qb, and has had much less playing time and opportunity than Denard.  We will continue to rack up yards against the Minnesotas and Purdues of the world, but we will not improve for the future or be able to consistently beat solid big 10 defenses with a gimmick offense. 

OK, go ahead and rip me a new one with the usual...."stop your panic", "one bad game with wind", "Borges called a bad game", etc.  But realize this assessment is from observing the last two years, not just yesterday.

On a positive not....Greg Mattison is a freaking genius.  While a couple of the missed tackles yesterday were sadly reminicent of the RR era, what that man has done with the defense in one year is nothing short of magical.  All this in spite of a slew of injuries on that side of the ball.

Go Blue

Blue since birth

October 16th, 2011 at 12:33 PM ^

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. 

Pinckneyite

October 16th, 2011 at 12:44 PM ^

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.

M-Dog

October 16th, 2011 at 1:44 PM ^

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.

 

 

Mauresi

October 16th, 2011 at 11:36 AM ^

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.
<br>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.
<br>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.
<br>
<br>Go blue!!

BILG

October 16th, 2011 at 11:46 AM ^

There is a reason Devin is getting so much playing time.  It's like the opposite of the Chris Leak / Tim Tebow qb rotation Urban did at Florida.  Tebow came in to run the ball.  Gardner comes in to pass the ball.  That's crazy if you think about it.  A starting qb is being pulled so the backup can come in to for passing plays. 

The coaching staff obviously sees something that many of us blinded by our love for Denard can't.  He is not a qb for the system we are trying to move toward and Gardner is a much better fit.  Devin may not be ready yet, but does anyone here really doubt he would start over Denard next year?  And if so, where does that leave Denard?  Time to start prepping these great Michigan men for where they will be playing on Sundays.

Muttley

October 16th, 2011 at 8:33 PM ^

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.)

Mitch Cumstein

October 16th, 2011 at 11:37 AM ^

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.

dennisblundon

October 16th, 2011 at 11:38 AM ^

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.

allintime23

October 16th, 2011 at 11:39 AM ^

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?

panthers5

October 16th, 2011 at 11:39 AM ^

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:

2011

V MSU-37% completion percentage

2010

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.

umchicago

October 16th, 2011 at 12:58 PM ^

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.

umchicago

October 16th, 2011 at 1:02 PM ^

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.

BigBlue02

October 16th, 2011 at 3:07 PM ^

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.

befuggled

October 16th, 2011 at 3:26 PM ^

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).

befuggled

October 16th, 2011 at 6:52 PM ^

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.

panthers5

October 16th, 2011 at 11:46 AM ^

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.

Naked Bootlegger

October 16th, 2011 at 11:46 AM ^

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.  

BlueUPer

October 16th, 2011 at 11:47 AM ^

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...... 

maquih

October 16th, 2011 at 11:47 AM ^

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.

BRCE

October 16th, 2011 at 11:48 AM ^

You're right - it is sacrilege in these parts. But it's completely ridiculous that it is.

There is nothing wrong with liking Denard, but the whole adoption paper/overprotective Hockey Dad approach that the creator of this website has taken with him thwarts healthy critical thought on the program.

 

 

BILG

October 16th, 2011 at 12:30 PM ^

This blog has become mental masturbation and thought validation for the sheep in need of affirmation, but fear healthy debate.  I see why you have negative infitinit points.

Many posters don't even read the thread where I post a history of Denard's performances vs. good defenses.

Again, the coaches must see something if they continue to give Gardner more playing time.

The Baughz

October 16th, 2011 at 12:01 PM ^

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.

MGoStrength

October 16th, 2011 at 11:50 AM ^

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.

ForeverVoyaging

October 16th, 2011 at 11:51 AM ^

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.

EnoughAlready

October 16th, 2011 at 12:06 PM ^

The OP presents a calm, articulate position.  He poses it for discussion.  He raises a legitimate point.

And others jump all over him.  Actually, I'll tell you the bandwagon affect:

a) Denard can do no wrong.  Only the coaches can fail him.

b) His poor passing is never his fault.  It's the playcalling or the wind, not Denard's accuracy or decisionmaking.

c) "These players weren't recruited for that!"

d) Denard must remain at QB because "he gives us the best chance to win" -- despite the INTs he throws AS a QB.

e) "MANBALL," said derisively.  "POWER FOOTBAW," said derisively.

f) Bolivia, lolwutz, bolivia!

That's a small sample of the bandwagon affect around here.  The OP was rationally proposing a personnel change for discussion.  

wlubd

October 16th, 2011 at 11:55 AM ^

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.