Does Pryor's Failure = QB Recruiting Boon for M?
If (and it's still a big if) Terrelle Pryor fails miserably as a QB at OSU, does Michigan become THE school for 5-star mobile QBs?
As an initial matter, with two competent QBs already playing and Gardner in the pipeline, a 5-star QB is unlikely to commit to Michigan in the next two years. Michigan is not USC, after all.
That point aside, Terrelle Pryor, barring injury, will be gone in two years, at which time we can take stock of his college career. Assuming TP doesn't come close to his hyped potential and sucks a big one at QB, does Michigan benefit on the QB recruiting front?
October 21st, 2009 at 10:39 PM ^
What about Oregon, Florida, maybe Penn State, and a handful of other spread based teams? I wouldn't rule out negative recruiting, but there are plenty of other options for mobile qb's.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:41 PM ^
we're not seriously in need of a QB probably for a couple years assuming Gardner gets a redshirt. Past that, people won't remember. I think folks have a remarkably short memory when it comes to these things.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:47 PM ^
If we get one more QB next year, we can probably transform Denard into a Percy Harvin type player who occasionally takes snaps and throws the ball maybe once a game.
I say this because I personally don't think that Denard is a good long-term option at QB, as his throwing is erratic, and would also like to see his speed utilized more often. If he were to be a slot receiver or something, he'd be able to get into the open field a lot more and run circles around defenses.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:51 PM ^
Denard is a true freshman. What do you expect out of an average true freshman? Most qb's take a few years to develop.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:02 PM ^
Denard back up Tate for four years or Denard switch positions and play more. Because while there's a chance Denard could surpass Tate next year, I honestly don't see it happening considering Tate's demonstrated skill set.
I didn't mean to imply that Denard would be a poor QB if he gets more experience. I do, however, assume that Tate will be a better QB than Denard after starting a full season, and thus getting more experience. Considering Denard's excellent physical gifts, I see no reason to make him a likely backup for four years when he could be utilized in other ways.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:10 PM ^
I think it's safe to say that something has to give between now and 2012. Rodriguez won't let both of these guys play QB for the entirety of their college careers. And Forcier isn't a candidate to change positions, so Robinson will a) beat out Forcier, b) transfer, or c) switch positions.
Which of those things happens, I don't know. But Rodriguez is too smart to let Denard's speed and playmaking ability rot on the bench or be used only for 10 snaps a game. It's just a matter of time.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:15 PM ^
what happens if Tate Forcier is injured while Denard is in his "Percy Harvin" position? Then we have Sheridan... and Cone... Last year anyone?
And saying that Denard could just be plugged back in at QB wouldn't work because Denard wouldn't have the experience and the rhythm with the offense and then the defense would be even more willing to crowd the line because they know that he can't pass well enough to be a starting QB.
Therefore Denard should stay at QB because, especially in our offense, a back-up QB is VERY important and Denard would be more developed if trained as a back-up QB where he can provide a spark for the offense with his speed and ability to semi-play QB
October 21st, 2009 at 11:23 PM ^
a) Sheridan probably won't be given a fifth year of eligibility unless he wants to pay for it himself.
b) If Forcier gets hurt right now, this team is screwed, whether it's Sheridan or Denard at the helm.
c) However, let's keep in mind that Sheridan and Threet were surrounded by freshmen, leftover skill players from the Great Migration, and linemen who used to eat whole pizzas for dinner. Sheridan is probably better than what we saw in 2008.
d) Our offense is only slightly more susceptible to injury than a pro-style offense, as far as quarterbacks go. A backup QB in Rodriguez's offense is no more or less important than a backup QB in Mike Debord's offense.
October 22nd, 2009 at 12:13 AM ^
He might not get a scholly to play QB, but I think it's a pretty good bet that he will be a GA for his fifth year.
October 22nd, 2009 at 12:47 AM ^
b. Screwed is a relative term, and Denard or even Sheridan still have a chance at pulling off a win, even against one of the three remaining opponents. I'm not saying it's likely, but it's certainly possible.
d. I realize that you're correcting the other guy, but a backup QB under Carr is still pretty important to have. There was at least one extra winnable game in '07 if we had a solid backup, and there were several games we easily could have lost if Henne had been out (or more limited). Tate's nagging injury and/or mild concussion so far makes it obvious that we can't just have one QB that can effectively run the offense.
October 22nd, 2009 at 2:33 AM ^
I have a feeling he is going to stick around and be groomed to coach in the future.
October 22nd, 2009 at 10:38 AM ^
He clearly really respects and likes the kid. Having an experienced qb on the bench may not mean as much next year with Robinson and Tate both having a year and Gardner coming in, but RR likes to have 5-6 scholarship QB's around.
It would not surprise me to see Sheridan being given another year.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:25 PM ^
My theoretical best case scenario is redshirting Gardner and Jones(maybe) next year, while continuing to have Denard be Tate's backup who plays ten snaps or so a game as a change of pace. Then we pick up another QB next year and move Denard to another position. This would leave the following as our depth chart in 2010 and 2011:
2010
1. Tate Forcier (Soph.)
2. Denard Robinson (Soph.)
3. Nick Sheridan (Redshirt Sr.)
4. Conelius Jones (Maybe)
2011
1. Tate Forcier (Jr.)
2. Devin Gardner (RS Fr.)
3. Conelius Jones (Soph. or RS Fr.)
4. Unknown Freshman QB
We could still play Denard as a quasi-wildcat QB occasionally (and yes, I know this isn't a true wildcat and am sure that someone will read this and be mildly pissed off after hearing NFL commentators screw this up all year), while playing him as a slot receiver, thus utilizing his speed regularly while ensuring both quality and depth at QB.
October 22nd, 2009 at 10:50 AM ^
You're forgetting the mysterious walk-on QB Jack Kennedy. He could be the 2010 #5 QB and the #4 for 2011 if he keeps developing and making the roster cut.
October 22nd, 2009 at 6:13 AM ^
Has stated that neither QB is a backup to the other. Their both considered starters and they get their snaps accordingly. So by switching them here and again if one gets hurt its just business as usual and the other one isn't cold or out of rhythm. It's a very good way to use them both and I hope I'm not the only one that gets that image of the western game and him turning on the jets to a TD every time he steps on the field. Every Michigan fan is just waiting and hoping he can torch Penn State Saturday for a couple scores. GO BLUE!
October 22nd, 2009 at 7:01 PM ^
RR has said that both will play, but I don't remember him saying that he considers both starters (unless you're talking about that preseason line that also included Sheridan).
October 21st, 2009 at 11:18 PM ^
I know it's not really popular on mgoboard to say things like this, but I really think Denard should stay the backup qb. He isn't a Chad Henne type passer, but he'll compete for playing time over the next few years and injuries to your starting qb do happen. I don't see him rotting on the bench, waiting for snaps. Having a very capable backup qb is to important, imo.
This is also under the assumption that Denard himself doesn't ask to change positions. I would have no issues if he wanted to switch positions if he changed his mind.
Plus, we don't really need more players in the slot.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:38 PM ^
With Tate in the shotgun, line up both Denard and Brandon Minor/Vincent Smith at RB. Have Denard lined up like we line up Carlos Brown when we throw him a quick screen pass, with a slot receiver/Kevin Koger and a wideout in front of him to block. Minor/Smith lines up next to Forcier. Forcier then runs a triple option. He can hand the ball off the Smith for a run up the middle, throw the screen to Denard, or run to the left using the Left Tackle for support. This would be a nightmare to defend (if executed properly, which is why it seems more realistic to try without a freshman QB making the reads) because you have to account for a power back up the middle, an incredibly fast back in the open field on the right side, and the potential for a QB run to the left. The defense would be dealing with a spread attack that includes a Hart-esque running up the middle.
October 22nd, 2009 at 8:05 AM ^
If you've thought of it, the coaches have thought of it too.
October 22nd, 2009 at 10:24 AM ^
Whenever I say something like this (when having a bad day at work) I get neg-nuked.
October 22nd, 2009 at 8:55 AM ^
i think denard should play whatever position he wants.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:51 PM ^
I wouldn't count out Denard. Don't forget that he's a freshman, who, unlike other quarterbacks on the team, has not benefited from professional training.
October 22nd, 2009 at 6:12 PM ^
You must, of course, be referring to D.Cone (in for lyfe), who attended the 8 Mile Academy for the Arts
That's febreeze people.
October 22nd, 2009 at 10:05 AM ^
Tate will NEVER get injured and if he does there we have so many QB's with experience to step in.
Seriously, Denard deserves the opportunity to get the coaching and time in the system. Let's get some solid QB depth first, slot isn't even the most critical need right now...
October 22nd, 2009 at 4:27 PM ^
reply removed
October 22nd, 2009 at 12:12 PM ^
If Pryor stays all 4 years then in a couple years when were QB hunting people will remember and if he does leave and braxton Miller does the same thing (which I think he could based on watching him play) or doesn't get the start and that recruit they got this year from IN starts that could help out UM with midwest located talent.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:42 PM ^
It means that spread QBs will probably shy away from OSU. Assuming that Pryor doesn't get better (as mentioned in the OP) and people forget about Troy Smith or look at his NFL career. That doesn't exactly mean that they are significantly more likely to go to Michigan, as there is no shortage of teams running the spread offense.
I think that successes will bring up the level of recruiting QB success more than anything. If we become the kind of offensive juggernaut that Rodriguez had at West Virginia, then more recruits on offense will want to come here.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:44 PM ^
I dont really see pryor failing or not effecting us. He went to OSU cause he wanted to be a pro style quarterback. Not all highly rated mobile quarterbacks want to go to a prostyle. If anything there are other schools that we will compete with like Oregon.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:45 PM ^
You can spin this however you want. I'm sure opposing coaches will try to say, "Look, you don't want to be at OSU, they'll never use your skills."
At the same time, Tressel can say, "I promise I'll give you pro-style experience if that's what you want."
October 22nd, 2009 at 8:06 AM ^
Tressel can also say:
"Hey, have you heard about our Buckeye leaves?"
October 22nd, 2009 at 12:13 PM ^
In which JoePa responds:
"come to penn staaaaaaaaaateggggggghhhh."
October 22nd, 2009 at 12:13 PM ^
In which JoePa responds:
"come to penn staaaaaaaaaateggggggghhhh."
October 21st, 2009 at 10:50 PM ^
I think if Pryor doesn't turn it around soon, then the next highly rated QB will be lining up to play for OSU. In my opinion, the recruit's view isn't so much "OSU ruined Pryor" as it is "Sweet, chance to start for OSU!!"
But, as you acknowledged, that's still a big "if." I'm a little apprehensive about talking about Pryor - all it takes if for Tressel to decide that the zone-read is a great play, and next thing you know TP goes off for 400+ yards at the Big House. Boy would that suck!!
October 21st, 2009 at 11:08 PM ^
because everyone kills people, murders people, steals from you...
October 22nd, 2009 at 8:07 AM ^
You're right.
His name is Braxton Miller.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:50 PM ^
someone would come out and say "rich rods system is a better place for 5 star safeties and linebackers"
October 21st, 2009 at 10:52 PM ^
What does "Pryor's failure" mean? If Pryor is indeed a failure, then I would think that means that OSU wouldn't be winning. If they only lose 2 games and Pryor just has a mediocre season, then I wouldn't call it a failure. You can't be a complete failure as a quarterback if your team is winning the vast majority of its games.
So if Pryor is a failure, that means the team is probably a failure. So if the team fails and becomes a 7-5 team for the next few years, then yes, I think that would help Michigan recruiting. But I don't foresee that happening.
October 22nd, 2009 at 2:57 AM ^
When you get 3 non-offensive touchdowns against Wisconsin. I might be called a loss for your QB.
October 22nd, 2009 at 8:08 AM ^
Except that the only stat that matters (you know, those pesky wins and losses), ended up being a win for that QB.
BOOM WON LOSS'D.
October 22nd, 2009 at 8:21 AM ^
If they're winning games, I wouldn't consider him a failure, but that doesn't mean he's necessarily a "successful" or "good" quarterback.
A pitcher can have a 15.0 ERA and still win games if he has enough offense around him.
October 22nd, 2009 at 12:18 PM ^
He is still failing at QB. Failing to progress in making reads, mechanics, leadership. If he were a 3 star recruit in HS then this all wouldn't be a big deal. Since he was who he was people flip a shit when he meanders down the road of medicocrity.
They are still winning but they were expecting a national championship game and at worst a 1 loss season. They now have 2 losses (which isn't bad) but still have to play Minnesota, Iowa, Penn St. and michigan .. and New Mexico St. They have played the easy half of their schedule sans USC ... now it gets tough and now the team faces a lot of controversy and adversity at the QB and HC position.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:53 PM ^
But it sure is a boon for dumb threads on Michigan message boards!
October 22nd, 2009 at 9:45 AM ^
not banned?
October 22nd, 2009 at 11:15 AM ^
I enjoy his presence, other people's irritation amuses me sometimes.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:25 PM ^
Well with UM being one of the 118 other D1 schools recruiting 5 star players, I will go with yes but there is 118 other D1 schools so.....
October 21st, 2009 at 11:27 PM ^
I bet you can't do it.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:43 PM ^
Umm!....[wiping sweat off brow] ......ummm!....[shuffling papers].....ummm.....Delaware State, shit no wait..uh...Appalachian State...oh dammit!
it was worth it :)
October 22nd, 2009 at 3:01 AM ^
Join a conference. Wait you want the NBC money. So tell Sponge Charlie Fatty Pants to stop complaining about the refs.
October 22nd, 2009 at 6:52 AM ^
"Sponge Charlie Fatty Pants"
This is definitely what I am calling him from now on. Ranks right up there with Cheatypants McSweatervest.
October 22nd, 2009 at 9:24 AM ^
We are in a conference, its the ND conference, it just too exclusive for anyone else to be good enough to get in on a full time basis. Just feel lucky that for 1 day every year, UM is good enough to play against this prestigious conference. :)