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

The Claw

October 16th, 2011 at 3:07 PM ^

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.

PapabearBlue

October 16th, 2011 at 2:02 PM ^

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.

 

lhglrkwg

October 16th, 2011 at 2:13 PM ^

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

GRFS11

October 16th, 2011 at 2:20 PM ^

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...

jrt336

October 16th, 2011 at 2:25 PM ^

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.

natesezgoblue

October 16th, 2011 at 2:27 PM ^

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.

BILG

October 16th, 2011 at 5:39 PM ^

Gardner missed some reads for sure...but that can improve with experience. 

Denard has proven (over the past 2 years) that he can't make certain throws.  Last week he missed Gallon streaking wide open on a post, this week he missed Hemingway on the same pattern.  Some of his throws are horrid and look like punts.  He misses wide open recievers by 5 yards at least 5 times a game.  His long balls are almost always a jump ball, never leading the receiver...he lacks touch.

Gardner has the better arm, pocket presence, steps into throws, and can see over the line.  He is a Vince Young clone athletically, with better fundamentals this early in his career.

His qb ceiling is much higher given the time.  The coaches obviously see something or he wouldn't be subbed in to make 15 yard throws down field. 

Spread option does not work against a quality Big Ten defens...as we have seen over the past two years.  I am sorry if this offends you, but it is a fair opinion, from someone who loves Denard and what he means to our program as much as anyone.

Last year I was neg bombed for suggesting that Gardner would start in a Jim Harbaugh offense when the RR firing rumors were swirling and JH was to be Bo's heir apparent.  Honestly, I was surprised that Denard started to begin this year in a Hoke offense looking to run more traditional and under center power play.  Clearly Gardner was not ready to take over, but the coaches are obviously grooming him, as can be seen by the increased playing time.  Now it is important to find a way to utilize Denard's talents as best possible as we transition to Gardner at qb.

GGV

October 17th, 2011 at 7:45 PM ^

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.

 

Y0ST

October 16th, 2011 at 2:36 PM ^

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.

robmorren2

October 16th, 2011 at 2:37 PM ^

We needed more screens and quick hitting passes yesterday. DR/DG ... doesn't matter. We got beat because we either can't beat a blitz, or we were unprepared for it. I think everyone can see DG is a million times better awful throwing the ball. Borges made a decent adjustment toward the end ... he went 5 wide so DR could see where the blitz was coming from. However, a double A gap blitz came and DR threw a pick 6 in the flats. It should have been a simple dump off to a wide open Koger. Would have been a gimme 10-15 yards. Either DR is too short to read blitzes and find hots, or he just doesn't have what it takes between the ears. I love the kid, but even his good passing games look poor in terms of mechanics and decision making.

spacemanspiff231

October 16th, 2011 at 2:44 PM ^

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.

omahagoblue

October 16th, 2011 at 2:47 PM ^

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.

befuggled

October 16th, 2011 at 3:11 PM ^

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? 

tomer

October 16th, 2011 at 3:12 PM ^

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.

go16blue

October 16th, 2011 at 3:16 PM ^

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.

gmoney41

October 16th, 2011 at 3:21 PM ^

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.

Medic

October 16th, 2011 at 3:39 PM ^

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.

maquih

October 16th, 2011 at 4:12 PM ^

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? 

go16blue

October 16th, 2011 at 5:40 PM ^

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).

panthers5

October 16th, 2011 at 4:17 PM ^

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.

tomer

October 16th, 2011 at 4:46 PM ^

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.

funkywolve

October 16th, 2011 at 11:44 PM ^

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.

bronxblue

October 16th, 2011 at 4:50 PM ^

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.

LSAClassOf2000

October 16th, 2011 at 4:36 PM ^

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.

bronxblue

October 16th, 2011 at 4:45 PM ^

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.

bronxblue

October 16th, 2011 at 9:25 PM ^

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.

PeteM

October 16th, 2011 at 4:55 PM ^

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.

bronxblue

October 16th, 2011 at 5:02 PM ^

Player 1: 

27/46 271 5.9 1 1

Player 2:

12/23 172 7.5 1 1

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. 

diji1994

October 16th, 2011 at 6:14 PM ^

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.

Wolverinefan84

October 16th, 2011 at 6:34 PM ^

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

mackbru

October 16th, 2011 at 7:08 PM ^

No, there's not much evidence re Devin's
<br>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.