Or our OC doesn't know what to do with certain types of players.
no, YOU'RE off topic
Or our OC doesn't know what to do with certain types of players.
You know we have a head coach too, right? Maybe let's not blame everything on Al Borges.
It's pretty well known that our head coach doesn't actually do anything other than recruiting, instructing the D-line and decide when to go for it during games.
At least he does all of those things well.
Ohio. 4th and 2, opening drive of the second half ring any bells.
It was the right decision, just the wrong playcall... And Borges calls the plays.
And Hoke is also the leader. Never ever ever ever forget how he handled the Hagerup OH-NO punt mistake. I cannot overstate how much his handling of that situation means to the integrity of our program.
Just because it didn't work doesn't make it a bad call. And one bad decision does not a bad decision maker make.
Out OC wants to play players that fit his desired style of play and Fleet is not SO dynamic that Borges should change the offense around him. Of our coaching changes over the past few years have taught u's anything is that it is important to have players suited for your desired system.
Norfleet was signed last year by Hoke. At the time, I seem to recall it was primarily to be a kick returner.
Borges staking his claim for most obstinate offensive coach in last five years.
To be fair, RR did try to convert Steven Threet into a run-first spread QB.
Not really. That was a pretty balanced offense and, besides, it's not like Threet could throw the ball anyway. People act like we had 2001 Miami or 2004 USC when RR showed up. That team had just about nothing to work with. What difference would it have made it RR tried to install the Wishbone, the Air Raid, the spread option, or just stayed with a pro-style offense? Maybe we go from 3-9 to 5-7, max, and that's if that clown Mallett stayed and we ran pro-style. Seriously, who cares? This horse is dead, beaten, rotting, and rancid at this point. And what's worse, the point is moronic and counterfactual.
Take out DeBord, and you've got the last 20 years covered.
Hey look - another inexplicable, idiotic move by our coaching staff.
Yeah right, the coaching staff that has taken the least talented Michigan teams in recent memory (at least 20+ years) and went 19-6. Im not saying to blindley listen to whatever they say but you act like they are incompentent. This is the best coaching staff Michigan has had since the Moeller days.
Seriously - you'd think after such a dynamic season at running back, the coaches wouldn't dream of moving him around. However will we find someone to make up those 14 rushing yards against UMass?
Exactly this. Hoke moved a player from a position where he was not going to contribute Rockne where he may.
You're absolutely right. Given our terrible depth at CB and all of our graduating players at that position, what we really need is a 5'6 RB to fill that gaps. Amazing how people here people on here reject even the most obvious criticisms of this coaching staff.
"Another idiotic move by our coaching staff" is not an obvious criticism.
So the staff that actually watches this kid everyday - the staff that is going for its 20th win in two years - is less-qualified to determine his proper position than you, random dude on the internet?
This staff isn't perfect, but they've gotten a hell of a lot more things right than wrong.
He was a true freshmen. Regardless, I think most of the discontent is that he represents one of the only really quick, fast, shifty guys on offense. I doubt anyone here would argue that he should be a feature back, but it's frustrating that a guy who has shown flashes of strong athletic ability will never get worked into the offense in some capacity.
How is it idiotic to move him from RB? Even this past year when our RBs were averaging like half a yard per carry (obviously not exactly, it was more like a full yard or something) he couldn't crack the top 3 RB spots. He rarely saw the field so perhaps he has limitations. Speculating, but maybe he fumbles, misses cuts, poor vision, drops on first contact - who knows.
Also, maybe his running style just doesn't fit what hoke wants to do.
I could see all of the angst if hoke were converting a stud RB to corner. But he is not. He is coverting a 4th string RB to corner.
Dennis Norfleet will never see the field at corner. That's why it's idiotic.
But Devin Norfleet might!
Do you know that he would at RB? As a sophomore, he'd be behind Fitz, Hayes and Rawls, and maybe behind a couple others too. It's not like he had a clear shot at RB either, especially since Hayes is his class and Rawls is only one above him.
Ok, so don't put him at RB then.
I think that's what they're doing.
Believe it or not, there are more than two positions in football.
Speculating, but maybe he fumbles, misses cuts, poor vision, drops on first contact
Obviously you're speculating (see how I picked up on that), but wouldn't any of these traits also be worrisome for a kick returner? I suppose it is possible not to be able to pick out holes in a more compacted run from scrimmage but have the abilty to find the right route when tacklers are more spread out like in kick return.
Norfleet seems like a kid who wants to contribute in any way shape or form. His attitude seems pretty emphatic when returning kick offs and hell the kid just excites me when he catches the ball and runs it out the endzone on kick offs. Maybe he wasn't happy with only returning kicks a few times a game and was looking for other ways to contribute so he had a sit down with the coaches about the depth chart and decided to give him a shot at corner as possibly the thinnest position. Does it necessarily mean he can't return to running back if the need arises? I mean look at Gardner.. QB to WR back to QB in less than half of a season roughly...
My theory is this is a trial run to see if he can be a good corner which I assume the coaches think there is a decent shot. If it doesn't work, they move him back to RB in the Spring or before Fall practice. It's not like learning RB is that hard that he couldn't go back before Fall practice and be able to play (ok, blocking is kind of hard but that's unlikely to be his specialty anyway).
I think the odds are near zero that he's moving to CB if they didn't expect him to be at least 2nd string at one of the CB positions (nickel?).
Remember, Borges RBs at SD State were small.
His RB's were small because he was recruiting at...SDSU. Look at Auburn.
I choose to see the upside in this by assuming we now have Derrick Green AND Ty Isaac in the bag... And Dorial Green-Beckham. That's why we didn't move Norfleet to slot.
For some reason I feel this is temporary for the Outback. I still see him as Michigan's next Percy Harvin/Quizz Rodgers.
Hey dol, merry dol! Ring a ding dillo! Ring a don, hop along, fal all the willow! Tom Jom, jolly Tom, Tom Bombadillo!!!
But i honestly cant remember a good 5'6" CB. I could be wrong but i really dont think there has been one here.
I don't think there has been one anywhere.
I guess it's a good thing that he's 5'7"!
So so so stupid. Now that he's at corner, he'll never be able to produce on the offensive side of the ball. A school like Michigan isn't going to ever let a kid playing cornerback and line up on offense, right?
"Schools" don't make decisions. Coaches do.
Luckily Hoke was on that staff, so we're good.
Ok, so because Hoke was on the staff 15 years ago when probably the best athelete in Michigan football history played both sides of the ball, Norfleet will be a successful on offense while playing corner?
It certainly doesn't preclude that he will be successful on offense. I think what I've gleaned from this is, given I think for the most part the staff isn't completely retarded, is that by their judgment Norfleet probably can't cut it at RB so they decided to try him somewhere else. The sky is not, in fact, falling.
Manti Teo would have been the first primarily defensive player to win the Heisman?
Unless he is Tyrann Mathieu 2.0, I'd rather see him in the slot receiver position...
I've wondered about this, too. Given his open-field elusiveness, wouldn't that make sense?