The Hot Seat
Hoke is not the one to take anything public regarding his concerns, and I thought Rich Rod's willingness to throw specific help at least near the bus if not completely under it was his worst quality and not the way to go about business. That being said, Borges has to be a concern at this point. His seat may not be hot yet, but it needs to be warm at a minimum. Regardless of who you have running your offense, and regardless of if he isn't your dream come true, your schemes at least need to make sense, to somebody, anybody. I have taken Brian's concerns with Borges a little sarcasticly to date, but I have to say I am concerned that portions of what I am seeing border on incompetence, and they are being accepted as the status quo.
I am not going to debate that Borges has impressed me from time to time with specific calls, but the number of times that his offensive philosophy against specific defenses has been outright baffling is too many to count on one hand now, and I think it is more than just a side note at this point. I understand that Denard going down was a blow, but backup quarterbacks can be remotely effective, and at least not outright humiliating as was the case last night. Bellomy was never rumored to be John Elway, but at the same time I don't think anybody took him for a fish out of water when he came in. True, our offensive line is not record breaking, but we are not converting defensive lineman for god's sake, this line is nobody's leftovers, they are a pretty solid group.
Hoke hired Borges in 08, and Borges' offenses at SDSU were solid enough, but I don't know if Hoke is married enough to Borges that he is in untouchable territory. Shane, along with the best offensive lineman class in the history of the world are certainly reason for optimism, but I have to say that Borges should be answering for something right now. I am not expecting the best show on turf here, I am just asking for a little rhyme and reason, and perhaps that there is a Plan B available in the case Denard cannot go. An injury to your starting quarterback is tough, but not tough enough to look like a fairly competitive high school team in the aftermath. I have been a Borges supporter, but last night was alarming even before Denard's injury.
Here's to hoping that this offense can get right before it ventures to Horseshoe, because the cat is out of the bag, this offense in ineffective right now, and I think it is acheiving beneath its personnel. Am I seeing this clearly, or is this misplaced? I would love to know.
October 28th, 2012 at 10:14 PM ^
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hispanic
He wasn't wrong. He is silly, but he wasn't completely wrong.
October 29th, 2012 at 8:19 AM ^
How on earth did you figure that hispanic didn't include the spansih...I mean, I'm not trying to be a dick, but look at the spelling of the word for pete sake.
October 29th, 2012 at 1:27 PM ^
is also kind of fat now.
October 28th, 2012 at 4:36 PM ^
denard = running spread qb
bellomy = slightly mobile pocket qb
you can't have a completly seperate for your backup, so bellomy playing like denard goes just as badly as if borges tried to turn denard into drew breise.
now if we still don't have a good offence in 2014 ok now its time to cut out losses with borges and find another option
October 28th, 2012 at 4:58 PM ^
October 28th, 2012 at 5:24 PM ^
Drew has become decidedly more French since moving to NOLA
October 28th, 2012 at 5:54 PM ^
October 28th, 2012 at 4:40 PM ^
Ok, I think I must have watched a different game than a lot of posters last night. We were 1st & Goal about to take the lead when Denard went down in the 2nd quarter. We had been playing conservative yes, but that doesn't mean we hadn't been able to move the ball up to that point. In fact before Denard went down the only play where I thought well that was just a piss call was the third and 3 where we lined up in the I and tried to run it. When you have the most dangerous running QB in football I think you give him at least a read on that play.
Now, after Denard went down is where people seem to be getting all up in arms. How dare Bellomy not be crisp and prepared stepping into a hostile night envioronment! Where is my pitchfork?! Dude stepped into the biggest game of his life to this point and was overwhelmed...it happens.
Now that said IMO he got no help from his recievers. You can blame play calling for dropped balls. Funchess let a ball go through his hands that, yes it was behind him, but was catchable. I have some forgiveness because he is a frosh too. But as I watched I saw 4 out of his first five balls get dropped by our recievers. His first pick was just freak, I mean that was just the football gods on that one. Kid had the heart to chase down the DB and save a TD letting our D hold them to 3.
On the Roundtree pass in the endzone...how can anyone here say that that wasn't almost a perfect ball. He stepped up knowing he was going to get crushed and put it out there for Roy to make a play. It wouldn't have been the easiest catch but someone has to help the struggling QB out. Take the heat off of him. If Roy catches that all of a sudden it is a tie ball game.
I understand being upset after the loss. Lord knows I am. It was a frustrating one. But sit down, and rewatch it. Football is a game of inches and I am confident when I say that on several occasions we were literally inches away from changing the way that game turned out. Unfortunately it was just one of those nights where none of the breaks went our way.
October 28th, 2012 at 4:43 PM ^
October 28th, 2012 at 4:48 PM ^
October 28th, 2012 at 5:14 PM ^
The rush was a big problem.
I suspect we don't have a good pass-blocking line (which makes sense, since they weren't recruited with the idea they'd spend a lot of time protecting a pocket passer) but haven't had to face it because teams are, rightfully, afraid to rush Denard.
October 28th, 2012 at 5:55 PM ^
October 28th, 2012 at 8:15 PM ^
You can't just look at thhe box score and say three picks...dude sux!!!
First pick is a 1/1,000 type freak play. Certainly can't blame Bellomy. I don't really blame Vince...just one of those bounces where the Huskers made a heads up play.
Second pick is the one I'm sure the poster was referring too. That was a duck in every fashion. No excuses there outside of inexperience. Looked like Russ jumped in the air and threw it. A panic pass where he saw he guy come open in a limited window, didn't have his feet set and saw a guy barreling down at him. Terrible throw all around.
The third pick was again something hopefully experience will fix. From what I saw it looked like he knew the safety was coming from the left late and so over corrected to try to keep it away from him. If that pass is 6 inches more to the left it is a true jump ball and a foot left it is an easy touchdown for Gardner.
October 28th, 2012 at 4:57 PM ^
Thank you. Borges allowed us to score one of our highest point totals ever against Ohio last year, Denard is still on pace to break the QB rushing record having started more games under Borges than he did under RR, and we had a 1000 yard rusher at rb last year who for some reason forgot how to play rb this season. Sounds like the guy has made some serious lemonade with the lemons he was given. Sometimes you just run out of sugar. Denard got injured. Can't be helped.
October 28th, 2012 at 7:37 PM ^
Just lol at comparing the offense Al inherited to lemons.
October 28th, 2012 at 5:03 PM ^
I had begun to think I was taking crazy pills. The "no TDs" thing sounds all terrible, but are we really surprised a frosh QB starting on the road in a hostile environment did not go so well? Is that really, and I mean really, all Borges' fault? Coaching only gets you so far...at some point, there is no substitute for experience in a game situation like that.
October 28th, 2012 at 5:57 PM ^
October 28th, 2012 at 8:43 PM ^
ONE! With a fifth-year senior QB in Landry Jones, at home at night, and with about as consistent and established coaching staff as exists in college football today.
It's not like Michigan's point totals against ND and MSU were unprecedented-ly (woo making up words) low for this season
Sometimes good defenses are just good. Again, I'm not saying Borges couldn't be better, because obviously he can and should be doing better. But context and perspective is extremely important here.
October 28th, 2012 at 5:53 PM ^
October 28th, 2012 at 6:05 PM ^
October 29th, 2012 at 1:47 AM ^
What game were you watching? That is exactly what Bellomy's first 10 passes were. We only started going deep on a consistent basis when we had dug ourselves a pretty deep hole.
October 29th, 2012 at 12:07 PM ^
explaining Bellomy and his first series.......now......explain the gameplan for the entire 2nd half!
Or - maybe the coaches weren't ready for this. Or - maybe Bellomy wasn't ready for this. Or - maybe the O-lone wasn't ready for this. Or - maybe the receivers weren't ready for this.....or....or.....or maybe Gardners's shoulder is injured - or - or - or.
What the hell is going on in practice ?
Are u really serious....explaining this away to the football gods?
I might give the gods one game a year...might.....Denard's goin to Denard....until a bad gameplan enters.
October 28th, 2012 at 4:41 PM ^
October 28th, 2012 at 4:42 PM ^
Everything's the worst.
October 28th, 2012 at 4:44 PM ^
October 29th, 2012 at 12:09 PM ^
It's kinda my thing...(Goldmember).
October 28th, 2012 at 4:49 PM ^
I am unsure if Borges the QB coach might not actually be a bigger issue than Borges the OC. Neither Denard nor Bellomy (nor Gardner last year) is showing great mechanics, timing or decision-making out there. With the playcalling, I can understand his thought-processes most of the time. But he needs much more sound fundamental play from his QB for it to succeed. Why aren't we coming along further in the passing game? Fundamental things like setting your feet, looking off your receivers, throwing to the proper shoulder, etc. just aren't happening consistently.
I have some concerns about Funk and the OL, too. We're getting dominated up front on a large portion of our running plays, regardless of the ball-carrier.
October 28th, 2012 at 5:02 PM ^
Molk could single handedly elevate those around him with his play. He is very much missed.
October 28th, 2012 at 5:02 PM ^
I award you all of the points.........
October 28th, 2012 at 5:03 PM ^
This is getting tiresome, but one more time won't kill me. Maybe, just maybe, the guys on the OL just aren't that good -- they were RR recruits remember? You know those guys, the ones that had all MAC offers besides Michigan's? Lewan is the one guy on the line that is on par, IMO, with what we've seen on Michigan's OL historically, and what we're likely to see in the near future.
Any wonder that Hoke went right to work on OL recruiting, and has put together two amazing classes in that area? Ya think it has anything to do with the fact that it's the key to ALL offensive success and is an area of SEVERE need and lack of talent in the Michigan program? Michigan's formula for success for decades was: play tough defense, have a HUGE and powerful offensive line, run the ball, have a QB with a great arm, and have WR's/TE's that will beat you if you over commit to the run. What part of that formula is in place right now?
October 28th, 2012 at 5:27 PM ^
Ricky Barnum was a 4-star recruit who had offers from #8 Florida, #11 South Carolina, Georgia Tech, and #23 WVU.
Elliot Mealer was a top-250 recruit who chose Michigan early over offers from MSU, Purdue, Cincinnati, Northwestern and would have had more if, again, he hadn't committed pretty much a year before signing day.
Michael Schofield was a top-250 recruit with offers from #4 Notre Dame, Iowa, Illinois, Purdue, BC and #24 Arizona.
Taylor Lewan we all know about. Offers from #2 Oregon, #13 Oregon State, #21 Nebraska, Oklahoma State (#24 in the Coaches Poll), Wisconsin, and Miami, despite getting almost zero attention until the start of his senior season in high school.
Patrick Omameh was a late bloomer and the lone under the radar guy but he still had offers from MSU and Cincinnati and was getting OSU interest before he committed to Michigan. He's also started on quite a few quality offenses in the past.
October 28th, 2012 at 5:44 PM ^
Fine, yet they cannot block their way out of a wet paper sack this year. Interesting that they were able to get 2 guys over 1,000 yards last year, Molk and Huyge leave, and they're suddenly incompetent.
Bottom line, this is an OL performance issue, nothing else. All the 1,000's of word written in here are moot, it's not play calling, it's not a square peg, it's not Denard's arm, it's the OL is, for whatever reason, incapable of blocking Michigan's base scheme effectively. When that happens, you're offense is doomed to be mediocre at best.
October 28th, 2012 at 5:55 PM ^
...Exactly.
That is the problem. The same reason Denard's completion percentage has dropped and his interception rate has soared despite virtually never facing pressure from opposing defenses is the same reason the running game is now struggling. We run a random grab bag of inverted veer, straight QB runs, bombs down field, and the occasional telegraphed tunnel screen or speed option. For the first time all year yesterday we ran credible play-action off something we actually run and it was repeatedly successful.
The problems aren't unique to this season either (3 quarters against ND, MSU, Iowa, Va. Tech, stretches of other games). Because the offense refuses to take free yards and doesn't force defenses to respect our alignment, fewer guys are blocking more and this is what you get. Throw in an improved schedule with 3 top-10 defenses and Denard missing half a game and that is what things look like.
Arizona doesn't have a fantastic offensive line and they have been plagued by injuries this year. Yet they just put up 200+ rushing yards and 500+ of total offense on USC because their offensive system moves defenders out of the box and big plays are then available if you can just block a couple of guys at the line or hit a receiver over the middle. We don't do that and as a result the big plays have decreased and Roy Roundtree's productivity has vanished from the offense.
October 28th, 2012 at 5:58 PM ^
The problem is not the name of the play, it's the execution. Why did Fitz gain 1,000 yards last year, but will be lucky to get 500 this year? Play calling? Doubtful. It's EXECUTION. Jimmy's and Joe's not X's and O's.
October 28th, 2012 at 6:38 PM ^
Our Jimmy (Lewan) is mashing their Joe (Gholston) into the ground. And yet the best that can happen is a 3-4 yard gain unless Denard literally picks up ghost powers and can run through defenders' bodies.
Then watch what Arizona did to Stanford and USC and Oregon State this year. Guys aren't getting pushed into the end zone by the entire offensive line. Dudes aren't making crazy plays. A running back gets through a small crack in the defense and he's off to the races and receivers occasionally are all alone in the middle of the field without beating anybody in coverage. Or conversely, watch Stanford when they have had success in recent years. By making teams overcommit (on the interior as opposed to the exterior) they produced a ton of big plays as well. The structure of our offense isn't providing those opportunities, despite a game changer at the QB position who alters everything opponents can do defensively.
It's pretty clear that Denard doesn't face pressure in the pocket based on opponent strategy and our line play. He and Roy Roundtree are the same guys they were two years ago. If you can explain why their production/execution has fallen off a cliff without saying "Well, they were good then but now they suck." I am all ears.
October 28th, 2012 at 7:38 PM ^
Sorry but Mattison doing what he did with the defense in one year - puts to rest the whole "jimmys and joes" over x's and o's.
I mean he took the defense that couldn't stop anyone and made it respectable in one year, with largely the same players that couldn't stop anyone the year before.
Borges has one of the top running QB's in the nation and he's repeatedly tried to use him like he's Joe Montana. It hasn't worked.
If Michigan's offense has then at least part of the blame goes to Borges. I'm not saying fire the guy but Hoke better sit down w/him and figure out what the problems are.
October 28th, 2012 at 5:52 PM ^
Look at all those MAC offers. Horrible.
October 29th, 2012 at 12:27 AM ^
was a 5 star running back. How'd he turn out?
October 28th, 2012 at 6:59 PM ^
You are just flat out speaking falsely right now. The OL all had MAC offers except for Lewan?
Schofield had offers from ND and virtually the whole B1G. He was a 4-star recruit.
Barnum was committed to Florida and had offers from Georgia, Georgia Tech, West Virginia, etc.
Mealer was a 4-star recruit with offers from most of the B1G (and a Lloyd recruit at that).
Omameh is the only starting OL who didn't have a wide array of offers. He did have a Cincy offer, and you know who came in and offered at the last minute? Ohio State.
So you saying the OL is filled with MAC recruits is just flat out false.
October 28th, 2012 at 7:03 PM ^
Fine, I stand corrected. I made a mistake, I wasn't trying to mislead anyone. But they cannot block this year. Which says to me, that they're not very good.
October 28th, 2012 at 7:46 PM ^
Or not very well coached.
October 28th, 2012 at 7:46 PM ^
Or not very well coached.
October 28th, 2012 at 7:50 PM ^
So all of them have just gotten worse as they've gotten older? Do you realize how dumb that sounds?
October 29th, 2012 at 12:20 PM ^
Uve never taught or coached, have you?
It's no secret...
...A good coach can: Make a poor player mediocre, a mediocre player good, a good player great.
...A poor coach can: Make a great player good, a good player mediocre and a mediocre player poor.
DENARD, DENARD, DENARD (I wonder why Bellomy and the receivers struggled?)
October 28th, 2012 at 5:08 PM ^
But Denard and Gardner are simply not natural passing QB's. Let's face it. They probably never will be like Brady out there no matter how much time the coaches spend with them. As has been said already - square peg in a round hole.
I DO think however that the OL has been underperforming this year. But whether that's due to coaching, the player talent, or effort it's hard to say. From what I've seen over the years, outside of Lewan, I think this OL is pretty ordinary talent-wise. It will take a few years until the upgrades in recruiting can make a big difference. Until then, we all have to be patient.
October 28th, 2012 at 5:11 PM ^
We simultaneously do and don't run a spread formation, read-option offense. We spread the field with extra receivers but don't run the short passing game stuff required to make teams alter their approach and defend the perimeter. So we're running into the same fronts with fewer blockers (I call it the un-spread). When we do so we're pulling guards every time (something these guys aren't as good at) and telegraphing plays early enough for teams to attack the mesh point instead of quickly optioning off one defender and using a zone scheme with maybe the occasional wrinkle to block everyone else. We hardly ever even run the straight zone-read stuff any more (inverted veer has pushed that out of the offense, which makes the north/south criticism of Fitz a little silly). In the passing game, linebackers and safeties are able to drop into coverage knowing they won't get consistently gashed on the perimeter (while easily recognizing and ignoring our play-action fakes) and Denard is forced to either throw into traffic or try to chuck long bombs over the top of the defense. Obviously that hasn't proved a recipe for success.
Denard is never going to be Peyton Manning but he can and has been a very successful passer. Borges just doesn't seem willing or able to do the things that would make his job easier, and the run game suffers from the same problem. I doubt Denard's fundamentals have gotten worse but his numbers have. Dramatically.
October 29th, 2012 at 12:24 PM ^
all these words on all these threads and you've nailed it....NAILED IT!
Thanx for paying attention.
October 28th, 2012 at 5:11 PM ^
The setting the feet thing has been a topic addressed by the coaches numerous times. That being said, they are either not doing what they say or Denard isn't working as diligently to improve that aspect of his game. Judging by the lack of growth by him and the reversion to throwing off of his back feet, I think that is on Denard. As for RB, he played a half at night in an intimidating stadium with alot on the line. That is alot for a player who is experiencing the position in any meaningful situation for the first time.
October 28th, 2012 at 4:52 PM ^
This is a ridiculous post. Maybe we can get Scott Loeffler back to be our OC? How is he doing at Auburn after they had a spread system and the playeyrs that go with it?