Currently, Gardner's passer reating is 190.2 according to ESPN. Obviously he has played against some assy mc-ass defenses, but extrapolated over an entire season, that would be the second best all time passer rating for an NCAA quarterback. Not bad for a guy who played wide receiver all year.
Fun Little Gardner Stat
Damn, I wish we had him for one more year.
Sorry, I meant after next year. I'm pretty sure he will not get a medical RS.
Will be RR's last little gift to our program.
Really the Forcier family's last little gift.
Obviously this program was left in shambles. I mean, Brady Hoke may have to recruit a QB by his fourth year on the job! That is bullshit! 19-5 with losses away from home to 11+ win teams from Bama, ND, and MSU, and a loss on the road to 9-2 Nebraska because Rich Rodriguez had the audacity not to leave behind an awesome 3rd string QB. Thanks, coach!
Rich Rodriguez just inherited a 4-8 Arizona team that lost its starting QB, RB, and top three receivers. He's already had a better season there than he ever had at Michigan (7 wins already, blowout victories over ranked Washington and Ok. State teams with a win over USC as well). Let's stop pretending he was the problem. The shaky logic the premise was founded on (recruiting sucks, the team is not living up to its incredible potential, etc.) clearly does not hold up any more.
So RR's record at Zona means it was a good idea to burn DG's redshirt? Not quite sure I see the logic in your response.
The redshirt hasn't been burned. We don't know what will happen.
Second, the backup QB was suspended. At that point, playing the next best guy is a good idea. That guy was Devin Gardner. You are taking potshots at our former coach for either, A. Disciplining Tate Forcier (who obviously needed it, since he eventually got booted from school), or B. Thinking Devin Gardner was a better option to put in games than Jack Kennedy (I know it is a close call, but Jack is no Russell Bellomy).
There is no logic in that. Like most people's opinions regarding our former coach, it is unfair and incorrect.
Tate Forcier was NOT suspended for the UConn game. RR had the option and he chose to play true freshman Gardner in front of the Forcier (who was the 2009 starter and his most experienced QB).
Forcier was in the doghouse during fall camp (lost his Wings) and he was suspended for the Gator Bowl due to academic issues but the choice to potentially burn the redshirt was RR's alone.
I'll always give the benefit of the doubt to the coach who is there every day with the player when it comes to discipline issues (unless said coach is named Mork). As Purp's stated above, with hindsight we know that Forcier had major discipline issues. I firmly beleive RR made the right decision in almost all disciplinary issues.
But, people feel the need to throw stones. They just need to have longer memories....
My problem with this is that I don't understand what he was trying to do. Tate Forcier's off-field issues weren't a mystery. He was enough of a problem child to warrant "removing the wings" in the offseason (and to get publicly criticized by several of his teammates). And I'm assuming he must have been on an academic alert list going into the year, because you usually don't flunk out of school because of just one bad term. Why did we only go halfway and let him dress but not play? What happened a couple weeks into the season to get him out of the doghouse? And was there any kind of a plan for handling Gardner's redshirt? It doesn't seem like there was.
People are bringing this up because it's an issue that will affect us going forward. Whether or not Gardner gets a fifth year of eligibility is a huge issue for the program. The 2014 season could be either rebuilding or a national-title run depending on the outcome.
Why did we only go halfway and let him dress but not play? What happened a couple weeks into the season to get him out of the doghouse? And was there any kind of a plan for handling Gardner's redshirt? It doesn't seem like there was.
I don't know the answer to that. My guess would be so that we had an emergency outlet in case of disaster (it is football after all). It could also have been to allow Forcier to "save face" somewhat, and keep his media centric family quiet. All speculation of course.
Regarding Gardner, I think they just didn't know how he'd perform in a game situation and there's really no other way to find out. I could be that there was a lot more concern about Forcier being able to hack it in school, and they felt they needed to groom Devin right away. Again, I"m just guessing here.
DG played in 2 games in 2010 - Uconn and Bowling Green. Tate played throughout the season including against OSU in the last game. So I'm guess your position is that Tate was being disciplined/suspended during the UConn game (despite the fact that he was dressed) and that is why DG went in? It can't be Bowling Green that you're talking about, b/c both Tate and DG played that game.
Maybe we disagree on this, but I think burning the redshirt of a highly recruited QB when you have 2 capible QBs on the roster b/c you want to disapline your backup QB seems questionable, if not illogical to me. Anyone is welcome to have their own opinion, but I'm not going to let you tell me I'm being "unfair or incorrect" toward RR to think it was the wrong move - which the actual events unfolding now support that it was.
Not to mention the fact that your point holds zero water wrt the Bowling Green game. Both DG and Tate played. If playing in only the 1st game of the season and not the 4th would increase the chances that DG gets the RS (which is possible, but noone actually knows), then that is another strike againt RR on this issue that your weak defense doesn't cover.
If DG does actually get the RS, which I guess is still possible, then I am wrong - I admit that, but like other posters above, I'd be surprised if he got it.
Criticizing RR for burning Gardner's redshirt makes no sense if you aren't also crediting him for recruiting Gardner. I think that was even more of a gift. Besides, if you want to bitch about the list redshirt year, blame Forcier for being a knucklehead.
Listen, I'm not a 100% negative RR guy, but this issue pisses me off and there is little/no defense. Just b/c he recruited someone doesn't mean its OK to completly mess up a huge decision like that. Also, you're essentially assuming RR is the only coach that could have recruited a QB of that caliber, which we know isn't correct.
I agree, its great that RR recruited and left the program with Devin and Denard (a much better QB situation than he was given - this is definitely one huge area where he left the program better than he found it), but I'm not going to give him a free pass on anything he did regarding them just b/c he recruited them. With that logic any sort of mismanagement of the roster in the future can't be criticized b/c the coach recruited them. I don't buy it.
Criticizing RR for burning Gardner's redshirt makes no sense if you aren't also crediting him for recruiting Gardner.
I'll give him a lot of credit for recruiting Denard as a QB (unlike most other schools), but recruiting Gardner was a no-brainer. He was a bluechip QB recruit right in our backyard. I don't think any Michigan coach - Carr, Rich Rod or Hoke - would have passed him up.
Besides, your point is a non-sequitur. Assembling a roster and then managing that roster are two different things. If you have two talented QBs, does it make sense to play a raw freshman that season?
Sorry about that.
Obviously if Gardner's redshirt was wasted under non-emergency conditions that would be dumb. My reaction had to do with more than that, obviously, though so did your initial comment.
It is just irksome that as the evidence continues to pour in that Rich Rodriguez did a fantastic job building and recruiting this team (Coach Hoke's winning percentage is better than Carr's, Moeller's, and the last 10 years under Bo despite fears of a long, arduous rebuilding process when he was hired) and that walking into a shitty situation at a shitty program he found a team in better shape than the one he got to coach his first two years at Michigan, people still treat the guy as some evil genius who was hellbent on ruining Michigan football and did just that. The guy is a great coach who did a great job here under atrocious circumstances. People should start acting like it instead of searching for grievances to explain why Coach Hoke has "only" been able to win 80% of his games here.
I reserve saying someone did a great job when they field a competitive team on both sides of the ball. I liked Rich. Up until his last game I thought he deserved another year just for the offense. However his D was atrocious.
I wish we could all just say let by gones be by gones and move on. He failed here. It happens. I hope he has a great career in the future and will always have a soft spot for him. But the fact remains that he isn't our coach anymore so really, who cares?
That's really all we can say. Our defense was terrible, which is put at the feet of RR since he hired the DCs.
I agree with the opinion that burning DG's RS in 2010 was a complete waste for the handful of snaps he got to play. It is also my opinion our spread offense under RR was better than our offense with Denard under Borges. Though we have only recently got an insight to Borges potential with an accurate and mobile pocket passer in as QB...and that is exciting.
I understand RR didn't get the support he needed to be successful at UM, but he didn't put in the pre-requisites that success requires either. I'm happy we have Brady, and I'm happy RR is at Arizona. I wish him the best.
Very well said!
I get that you're a RR guy and all that, and that's fine, but I think it's hard to defend him on this one.
Forcier was never suspended for any regular-season game. He was dressed for every one and in the first month of the season, there was an "OR" in the depth chart between him and Gardner. We were told from the staff itself that the competiion between the two for the backup spot was extremely close. When Denard briefly went down in the UConn and ND games, we had both backups warm up on the sidelines, but then went with Gardner. If the goal was to punish Forcier, we seemed to be sending him mixed signals, allowing him to dress, be listed on the depth chart and get loose on the sidelines, and then not play him. Most observers figured that it wasn't any punishment - Gardner had simply passed him on the depth chart.
Then in week four against BG, Forcier was suddenly ahead of Garner on the depth chart and got in the game much sooner. For the rest of the season he was our clear-cut #2 guy. It was hard to imagine in retrospect that the competition between him and Gardner was ever that close. The playing of Gardner over Forcier in the first two games must have been disciplinary-related, but if it was, we half-assed it, given that we permitted Tate to keep dressing for the games and getting ready on the sidelines. We treated the guy with kid gloves even as he was texting reporters and telling them "I'm out."
From there on, Gardner never saw the field again. This would have been fine from a medical redshirt standpoint - except that he dressed for every game and was not listed on those little injury charts that RR gave out. You have to have an actual injury to receive a medical redshirt. I think we belatedly claimed that he had one around December, but then RR blew his cover by saying that Gardner would be ready to go for the bowl game (when Forcier was now out of school).
Given the evidence - that Gardner dressed every week, that he wasn't listed on the injury reports (which probably weren't a great idea to be releasing out publicly), and that our own coach said he'd be good to go in the final game of the season - I'll be shocked if he's granted the redshirt.
You almost make me second guess my own opinion.
Week 4, Tate moved up the depth chart because that's when Devin got hurt, which is why he is trying to get a medical redshirt, not a regular redshirt.
That's like saying coach Hoke shouldn't have used him last year becuase they could have redshirtted him... He obviously used him as the #2 QB, maybe coach rodriguez just thought he was better than Tate and in that regard you can't fault him.
All in all coach rodriguez MAY or MAY not have burned his redshirt in his freshman year, but Hoke most certainly did LAST year. I understand they were different circumstances and Gardner won us/helped us win a few games, but if we're comparing an extra year to a probable win against Illinois there is no discussion.
Coaches make decisions that they believe are the best for the team.
all this arguement could be moot. Whos says he doesnt leave after next year? He's got size, arm strength, speed and accuracy. If he's has a good to great yearhe's almost be certain to be a high pick.
This is a really good point that I have not thought of. We can only hope he has a good enough season to leave early. That would mean great things for us next year.
If we know one thing, it's that you either have to be a RichRod fan or a Michigan fan. Can't be a fan of both. On that note, I guess I hate Tommy Amaker too. In fact, why don't we just hate every prior Michigan coach, whether they were fired or not.
You don't think he'll get the 5th year? From what I hear he should get it no problem.
I see no reason to believe he'll get that extra year. He was on the depth chart that eniter year, was dressed for games, traveled with the team.... he is not getting a medical waiver or he'd have gotten it by now, as all others in a similiar situation do (including Michigan players during the same time period).
Ummmm, he hasn't received the medical RS because he hasn't applied for it yet. He fits the criteria, and I see no reason to think it wouldn't be awarded.
What was his injury?
he had a back injury...and he did not play another snap the rest of the year. He will get his redshirt and everyone claiming they have info to the contrary is full of shit
Other than what I saw, which was DG dressing for every game and probably not playing another snap because he was the 3rd string QB, and RR being really vague when asked about his "injury." Hopefully that's enough to "fit the criteria," but I'm not getting my hopes up.
I'm going with this guy. Doesn't know anything other than what he saw, which is good enough for me! Also, usually, when the NCAA looks into granting the medical waiver, they have a "vagueness" scale that they use for how the coach talked about the injury. I know, crazy, right? I just can't believe no one has mentioned it but you. Based on me knowing nothing about the situation other than watching games on TV, listening to press conferences, and your amazing insight into how vague RR was, I am positive he isn't getting it.
I hope you're right, but you have to have actual medical documentation of an injury to receive a medical redshirt, and it seems like that would be hard to produce for a player that dressed for every game.
They won't decide until after next season. It would have been impossible to have received it already.
I don't think this is true. I'm pretty sure you can, in fact, be granted a medical redshirt not long after the season in question is completed. I don't understand our school's official explanation here. I've never heard of a school having to wait until after a player's senior year to learn whether he got a redshrt in year one. (Next year, I guarantee you Blake Countess will be listed as a redshirt sophomore, and not as a junior.)
Either we're bluffing (to cover for the previous staff?) or there must be some kind of secondary appeals process to get retroactive redshirts granted.
I thought I remembered reading that we haven't applied for it yet. In that case, it actually would be impossible to get it by now. I also thought I read that you have until their senior year to apply for one, which could explain why many are still optimistic about the redshirt even though we haven't heard anything about it yet.
Haven't applied for it yet.
Actually we do and maybe a second!
We don't know yet if he will or won't receive his redshirt...at least from what I have heard...and OSU's D is a little better than on par with the teams Gardner has already played
If Gardner goes Vince young on OSU then we may have something
Devin "Vince Young" Gardner with Denard Biakabutuka. OSU defense is in trouble.
I like the sound of that!!!
Please let this happen. To ruin their season and shatter the illustion that Meyer is just going to pick up where Tressel left off and keep on trucking will be delicious.
Some "assy mc-ass defenses"?? If you say so.
He's also tied now for the most rushing TD's on the team. Add to that he's second on the team in recieving TD's. With 2 TD passes against Ohio he will be tied with Denard for most Passing TD's on the team.
Im not taking anything away from Denard, because I know if healthy he would have used the three games he was out to do some serious stat stuffing. But none the less it is very impressive that in 3 games Gardner has almost equaled are entire scoring output from one position.
Little OT but did anyone else notice ESPN has changed Denards position?
Dude is convinced that Gardner won the job and they are making the transition. Let me just say I don't think he is a very good journalist, but yeah. They keep saying that we have made the transition even though I bet Denard would start if he could.
Example, he didn't throw yesterday which basically convinced me that he is still having trouble doing so.
Maybe we should go back and change McNabb to a RB too. He is not a very good sports journalist, I will agree. He is very talented at writing human interest pieces (I guess that's what you would cal lthem) about the other side of sports.
This is stupid. It was obvious that Denard was in the role he was in due to injury. He ran with the ball in his left hand the whole game and never attempted a pass. Maybe ESPN doesn't want him to climb the "all time QB run stats" list. I think yesterday should have put him in second place.