Frequency/Timing of putting Shoelace in...
This is not meant to be another Tate vs. Denard thread.
Tate is our starter, that's the way it should be.
What I'm questioning is how frequently, and *when* Denard is put in... or rather when he is *not* put in.
This is something I've been thinking about since the MSU game, and just really felt it again bigtime today.
Why was he not in more? Yes, 1 fumble, 1 INT, I know... but... It seems like when he's put in isn't really at an advantageous point in the game. When he's put in, it seems like it's at points in the game where Tate is unproductive, and thus, there's no momentum on offense. Denard is essentially being put in when we're at a decided situational disadvantage.
For example, I was hoping and praying that when we had that short field near the end of the first half (when we scored the FG), that RR would put Shoelace in. No dice. I thought that was the perfect time for him to go in. With a short field, and a somewhat low pressure situation, seems like that would be a great time to give him some good reps and put him in position to flourish.
Furthermore, in most of these games, he's been getting in for 2 or 3, sometimes 4 drives.
I would love to see Denard in more, perhaps getting 35-40% of the reps.
This would benefit Denard's development, and I think make things easier for Tate, because the more you mix it up, the more the defense is going to be on its heels and constantly having to adjust.
Further along those lines, it seems like most of the time they aren't mixed in during the same drive. Either one of them will play the whole drive.
Why not mix them in more during the same drive to keep the defense on their toes and constantly having to adjust?
October 24th, 2009 at 7:25 PM ^
waiting to happen, look I know he's elusive and can be a game breaker, but he hasn't done that since the first game vs a poor WMU team.
He's not ready to command a D1 offense and shouldn't be in there unless there is an injury or Michigan is in control of the game.
FWIW there were 12 PSU defenders on the field for the INT so that one really isn't on Denard......but the evidence speaks for itself, what is it now 6 int's and 2 fumbles?
October 24th, 2009 at 7:27 PM ^
I had no problem with Rob getting in. I just don’t think he’s ready for those 3 and longs yet. In the first quarter when it was 3rd and long I would have like to see RR put Tate back in. Rob will be ready some day, but he’s not right now.
October 24th, 2009 at 7:28 PM ^
Why don't they ever put them in on the same drives anymore, seems to me it would make it harder for a defense to sub in and out if they have certain players they want for certain QB's.
October 24th, 2009 at 7:40 PM ^
thought that today. I'm not seeing innovation. At all. I'm seeing Michigan cycle through its playbook, regardless of what's working. We could run on PSU- why not pull a Bo and shove it down their fucking throats all day?
And to your point (sorta), why not GET DENARD IN SPACE?
I'm scratching my head about this coaching staff. There damn well better be some improvement on both sides of the ball.
October 24th, 2009 at 7:46 PM ^
Agree wholeheartedly.
Although it was the last point in my OP, this is actually the biggest beef I have w/ how they're splitting the time.
I wonder why they're doing it like that.
Maybe they want each quarterback to really take ownership of the drive they're running? I don't know if that's the case, it's the only reasonable explanation I can think of though. Although, they sub in other positions down-to-down in the backfield and w/ WRs and TEs.
It just seems to me that if on any given down, the D doesn't know who the QB is going to be, that constant need to adjust would give major, major headaches. Even if that doesn't become our constant MO, even if we only do it every now and then it seems like it'd be really advantageous to us.
October 24th, 2009 at 7:31 PM ^
FWIW, the first time he saw the field it looked like there was a slight injury to Forcier on the previous possession.
October 24th, 2009 at 7:32 PM ^
That ghey illegal formation ruined everything for Denard. Moving the ball, then bam. He just needs time and more reps. Plus Tate has not been good for awhile now.
October 24th, 2009 at 7:33 PM ^
Definitely Agree. While he has turned it over a bit, if they would mix Tate & Denard on the same drive, it might keep the defense off balance. Also, why not put them on the field at the same time?
I thought they became really effective when they FINALLY started using the zone read with Robinson. He's just run straight ahead all year, but when he's faking it to Minor and keeping it, that definitely opened up some better holes for him to get through. Is it just me, or is Rich Rodriguez a really stubborn coach?
October 24th, 2009 at 7:53 PM ^
Agree w/ you up until the last sentence.
RR is widely regarded as an elite football coach. Thus, I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt as to why he's doing what he's doing... there may be reasons behind his decisions that none of us are even aware of.
October 24th, 2009 at 7:47 PM ^
These are results of all of the DRob-only series
ND (no DRob-only series)
Indiana 1 TD, 1 fumble lost
MSU 1 punt (three & out)
Iowa 1 TD, 1 INT
PSU 1 INT, 1 fumble lost
DRob has contributed fairly well when he compliments Tate in a series. (And isn't asked to convert on 3rd & long.) But going with someone who has produced four TOs, two TDs, and one three & out on his drives is rolling the dice when the odds aren't in our favor.
I love DRobs raw skills, but just like most true freshman, he really isn't ready yet to carry the team.
October 24th, 2009 at 8:00 PM ^
He needs way more work and he's turning the ball over at the worst times. No team respects his passing ability so they jam the box and and zone him up when it's a passing down.
October 24th, 2009 at 8:02 PM ^
I say put in the CONER and run QB draw every play. LEt them try to stop him.
October 24th, 2009 at 8:45 PM ^
That's when Denard Robinson should play quarterback. Until Denard learns not to throw Int's or fumble the football, he shouldn't play QB in critical situations...period. Anyone watching can pretty much guarantee that when he has his hands on the football, something bad will happen eventually. He does have a lot of upside, but at this poing the downside is too great. Today, while still in the game, his interception was crucial and turned the momentum in PSU's favor greatly. I can't stand to watch when he comes in anymore. Keep him out until he stops killing us with horrible turnovers.
October 24th, 2009 at 9:04 PM ^
They really need to figure out a rhyme or reason to when he plays, and work to build a playbook for him that is more than handoffs, QB draws, and passes they have never put him in position to make before. It's so completely predictable, and causes him to be one-dimensional and ineffective.
They missed a golden opportunity last week to get him some game reps throwing the football, and didn't do it. And they had another opportunity at the end of the game with 4 minutes on the clock down by 4 scores, and didn't do it. There is nothing gained by Tate leading a garbage time drive when Denard needs game reps doing more than running the ball.
This just isn't the way to run a 2-quarterback system, and I would say there is definitely merit to the argument that there are better ways to use Denard than at quarterback.
October 24th, 2009 at 9:43 PM ^
We need to go back to what we were doing in the ND game. Tate should start every series, with Denard sprinkled in as a change-of-pace guy. Asking him to lead our offense on entire drives is too much. He's fine on first and 10, but when it gets to third and long, he just isn't ready to make the plays we need in the passing game.