spoiler alert: i linked this
Once Hoke and co. get Juniors and Seniors that they've recruited, then we can judge their effectiveness. We're still dealing with the round Denard peg in the square Borges hole, and I don't know how much we can actually pin that on Borges because he doesn't have a whole lot of experience dealing with somebody like him.
We got lucky with bounces last year, disguising a probable 8-4/9-3 record to 10-2. We're not getting as lucky this year.
To be fair, I do think Borges deserves a bit of the blame. Some of these playcalls have been mind-blowing.
am I saying to show Borges the door after last night, but I don't know if we should wait for juniors/seniors to judge coordinators. Head coaches? Absolutely. I just think it's a lot easier to judge whether a coordinator is doing their job correctly than it is to say the same about a head coach.
My concern is that I think we saw with Denard down what the offense may be like next year as well. Why do I say that?
First, because outside of Denard (gone), Lewan (who may be gone too) and arguably, Funchess, I think we have seen that the rest of our offensive players are just guys. By just guys I mean average B1G players. And average B1G players are at this point, not great players by national standards.
Second, whatever your opinion about Borges, I think it is well established that he will not have a "schematic advantage" over most good defenses we face next year. He may be a perfectly competent OC, and I don't hold the OP's view that he should be on the hot seat, but IMO it is beyond dispute that Borges does not, for whatever reason, have game plans that stymie, confuse, or in any way make defenses hesitate, especially in big games. And with average players scheme becomes more important, just as with elite players it loses some importance.
I'm not saying panic, but I don't think next year, with at least 2-3 freshman on the O-line, a possible Freshman QB, (and neither Bellomy or Devin have shown a thing, so their presence wouldn't change this view), average WR's, and average RB's, is going to be anythig to get excited about, and potentially it could be very disappointing. Hope I'm wrong.
Wait to see what a coach is actually building before you jump to conclusions one way or another? What a novel concept. If only that were the Michigan way...
I was thinking it. You said it.
Ridiculous. A coach's accent should tell you everything you need to know about his abilities.
lol no shit.. completely agree.. if we aren't dominating in a couple years then what? RR got ousted after a few years, so why not hoke and company if we are still mediocre?
We will most likely tread down the path of consistent 8-4 or 9-3 wins and Brandon will be happy with it.
...Nebraska and Frank Solich. The difference between 12-0 and 9-3 has something to do with coaching, but also quite a bit to do with luck. When you fire someone good, hoping for someone great, sometimes you get Bill Callahan.
So be patient, and have a little faith... Who knows?: Tom Brady may one day turn out to be a better quarterback than Drew Henson!
Wait, so you're saying coaches should be given at least 4 years to build a team? What a novel concept!
In all seriousness though, you're right. We have got to stop the unrealistic expectations and understand that we had 3 coaches in 6 years. The first coach slacked on his recruiting for the last few years of his career. The second coach walked into that bad situation and couldn't handle it and the situation deteriorated further due to both inside and outside reasons (seriously, its gotta be tough to recruit when people are calling for your job half a season deep). Now, after a few bad games of the second season of the new coach's tenure, we're ready to fire his OC because he isn't a good fit with the second coach's starting QB.
Its gotta stop somewhere.
Carr's last 4 years of recruiting went according to Rivals:
2004: 8th, one 5 star
2005: 6th, one 5 star
2006: 13th (19 recruits overall), two 5 stars. If you go by average stars/player they ranked in a tie for 5th.
2007: 12th (20 recruits overall), two 5 stars. Only 3 teams ranked higher didn't have at least 25 recuites.
and a lot of bust. Recruiting rankings just mean you have guys more likely to succeed not will succeed. Not to mention a lacksadasical attitude toward conditioning by LC toward the end of his career.
Carr recruited a number of 4 star db's and lb's his last 4 years (Micheal Williams, Donovan Warren, Stevie Brown, Cobrani Mixon, Jonas Mouton, Brandon Harrison, Chris Graham, Chris Rogers). Are all these guys going to pan out? Of course not. But watching Mattison turn what was one of the worst defenses in the country in 2010 into a damn good defense in 2011 makes me think it wasn't so much that the talent wasn't there, but rather the coaching was just god awful on the defensive side of the ball.
You know RichRod was starting 3 walk-ons at one point in 2009, right? But you're right, it was all coaching. The talent was there, RichRod just chose to start walk-ons
One thing that people just seem completely ignorant on: Those little FRs or SRs next to the names? They matter.
Yes, Mattison is wonderful. He's been nothing but amazing. He's a fantastic DC.
But do you honestly think that in 2010 our defense would have been that much better with our entire secondary made up of freshmen and sophomores? Do you think Mattison is going to turn SO Floyd, FR Vinopal, SO Kovacs, FR Avery, FR Talbott, FR Christen, etc. into a top 20 group?
That's what so many people just cannot seem to grasp: Mattison could probably have coached those guys up to their full potential and maybe we make a few more stops here and there, but when you don't have at least SOME experience to mask a freshman here or there (like Mattison has had these past two years) things can get ugly fast.
first off i must admit i dont care for borgess,you are right in saying its not his recruit in denard,but thats just an excuse to throw out, first he is a coach that calls plays,and boy let me tell you his play calling has rattled me to the point of me asking wtf is he thinking,yes denard is not great passer, but denard can still throw a good ball,no this is not all of borgess fault, recievers are dropping good balls too, but as i said HE IS THE COACH,and hes had time to implement something more stable than what ive witnessed the last couple games,i also blame hoke for not sittin toussaint down and playin some more of rawls,he should have known by now that fitz season aint goin nowhere ,it has showed,and to not at least let rawls try..to do anything is beyond me, id be lying if i said i wasnt one calling for borgess job if this continues,lets hope he had bad days and is outta this no sense calling,we have some games left to see,so yeah not all his fault but no excuse, its his job to have them up and goin ,thats like saying greg mattison didnt do nothin to the defense cause they where rods,bullcrap, a good coach prepares his team well,and it shows in his coaching,we will not win the biggest test for us in ohio coming up if this offense continues like it has, defense is good but they need this group to step up,and its silly that we do have talent at recieving gardner can catch, dileo,hell gallon..and funchess, even got roundtree,nope im not accepting excuses,just lack of good coaching and players not bein utilized or just overplayin,underplayin,not just borgess but that whole offense needs to get real about who they are,hell the only offense in last games we have had to rely on is kicker gibbons..id rather see denard keep plugging passes downfield to show teams we arent scared to pass, but we mostly get caught in trying tooo many run plays, we shouldnt be running on no 3 down when last 2 where runs as well,that kind of calling hasnt and will not work on bigger team,to win on run we must get respect of our pass,denard is a playmaker not our evry play saviour,its time to step up playcalling and start to hold these recievers more accountable
look it up dude.
Snowflake thread. Let's hire Chip Kelly for OC! Or Gus Malzahn! Bill O'Brien? Sexy Baby Jesus?!
We're going with Saban as DC, Chip Kelly as OC, RR as QB coach, Frank Beamer is taking over special teams, and Pat Narduzzi will fill the newly created "Unnecessary Roughness Coordinator" position.
Also, Desmond is coming back to coach WR's, Mattison will stay on as DL coach, Kirby Smart is taking over LB's, Woodson will trade the Packers locker room for an office at Schembechler Hall as DB's coach, and Tom Brady will take over recruiting coordinator duties while Gisele heads up the team of hostesses.
Now we'll never have to worry about losing in Lincoln again!
I think Dantonio may be a better special teams coach. Maybe they can be co-special teams coaches?
can have that job Tressel took with the Colts. What was that title, Replay Assistant? Dantonio can be a QC assistant with a headser that reccomends going for fakes or actually kicking.
ever coaching in the Big House for us. He is not worthy.
Everyone liked the "ForGodSakes" quote at the hire, but it isn't funny anymore. Been a season ticket holder for over 20 years and it isn't funny anymore.
We, as fans, were screwed before and during the RR hire and since the Brandon hire, are continuing to get screwed. It's about butts in seats....not tradition.....not pride.....
If our backup qtrback has an injured shoulder to the point that he can't go up for a ball in the endzone....and cannot play qb.......that's on the coaches! Can't use his shoulder to hold a ball from center, so, maybe he can catch it if it falls in his jock?!?....that's on the coaches. If he's lazy, or inept, or they see some other thing they don't like....why is he playing at all???
When u have 2 timeouts left, in a threatening scoring position with just under a minute left in the half AND have just put in your 3rd string QB and you don't burn one of your timeouts to get everyone on the same page AND to give ur OC a little more time to plan to try to score before halftime.....that's on the coaches.....during practice......during scrimmages......during the game.......that's on the coaches!
Hoke and Borgess and Mattison may very well have this grand plan to dominate when "their" boys come to harvest, but, I doubt it seriously. If u can't manage the clock (and they haven't - ever!) and can't use a kid (Denard) to his fullest abilities any better than they have, then how the hell are they ever going to get anything out of "their" kids?
Denard set himself up for all of these records before Hoke and Borgess got ahold of him.
Yes, I understand the line is important. Yes I understand there are some dropped balls. Yes, I understand that they play with injuries......sorry, what's the coaches next excuse?
This isn't junior high or high school...duh...there are big salaries with big expectations here. Although the talent level may not be comparitave to other schools at this time, there is absolutely no reason for this lack of offensive production other than gameplanning.
I've been making fun of the buckeye fans since the start of the season for their lack of formidable opponets at the beginning of the year....and now....I wonder if we could outscore any of them.
We're all armchair coaches, but, we're not being paid what they are and don't have the day in and day out experience that they have.
They're supposed to be able to figure this out.....FORGODSAKES!
to my post, or something that got deleted, or what?
ending....we lost a night game in a hostile environment with our true offensive playmaker getting hurt and you are talking about firing people. Are we Michigan Staee? Move on - you may be putting too much time into football viewing
Michigan State, Nebraska, 00000 visits to the endzone. Denard got hurt end of second quarter last night, and we had torched the scoreboard for 3 points. Ohio State scored over 60 points against Nebraksa, 60!! The Huskers are not exactly the 84 Bears here.
Come on, you can't be that dismissive.
Come on, you can't be so overreactive. MSU was a very good defense, and our O flat out did not execute to their ability...thus no TDs. Remember that time we won the game anyway?
As for last night...Denard would have had a 1st and goal if he wasn't injured, and M had starting moving the ball actually pretty well by that point. As for not getting a TD after that...well, I'm not sure how much blame you can give to Borges when he's working with a QB who couldn't hit an out, a slant, a deep throw, or much of anything against a very competent secondary, coupled with a surprisingly ineffective run game.
I'm not saying Borges deserves no blame...but the whole overreacting "hot seat" thing drives me nuts.
put Brady as QB coach, Desmond as Recruiter, and Kate Upton as Hostesses. Braylon as WR coach.
since 2000 and three of those came this year. In 2008 with one freaking returning starter and Sheridan/Threet at QB we still managed to score a TD every game. I would be embarrassed to say I'm the coordinator of this offense.
true to that statement,it is foolish to throw him out this early, but can not accept dumb play calling that i have witnessed from back to back games,hell im not only person who thought this ,yes denard was making some decent plays before he got injured,still before he left borgess called 3..3 run plays in a row expectin what? a denard breakthrough,maybye ,i sure of hell didnt have alotta faith when he handed off to toussaint, who i might add has done nothing but hit bricks every game he has played this year,then an option on a third down?...do u see why we are gettin a lil bit fussy, a lil bit nervous, its been the coaching of borgess that called alotta bone head plays that made no sense,as ive said now and ill say till the end its the coach responsibility to have his offense prepared,look what mattison has done on d,yes im frustrated with borgess ,and hope he can pull it back together,if not then reality has to come to light and hoke might have to make that call,not just for team sake ,for his as well,again it is too early to justify firing ,but cant keep this up also,sorry unaccetable,and to make a remark like he has a player like robinson that doesnt fit his style,,haha,what a joke,thats like saying bulls couldnt coach jordan almost,because he was diffrent,he is a offense cordinator i think he be happy having him to do all kind of things, again no not all borgess, but cannot ignore his role,and that is to produce and pull talent frm his crew, and so far its only been gibbons, even hoke wich i believe is a good coach,seems like a good fit here,has also baffled me with some of his moves , prime ex;toussaint hasnt produced to lighten load for robinson yet this season, yet rawls when he played against purdue came away with good gains and looked like he had passion in his running,yet hoke failed and still has failed to pull him for at least a couple of downs a serires or 2 to give rawls a decent chance at trying to help,even watching his interviews after some key loss,even a win wich rawl did better than toussaint hoke has said and blamed the line for his poor performence all season wich is crap because ive seen all gam es and most where horrible attempts,that not a kinda thing we need to start making excuses,he shoulda pulled him at least 2 games ago and gave rawls more oppurtinity,would it have worked cant say, might if was evr given more opp,so i guess we will run toussaint again,then wait for some other excuse than saying we need to explore all options,espically when his play has been this bad,but i am a wolverine fan regardless,and hope the best for this staff,but something needs to be adressed here with these serious issues, cause we still have hopes to finish strong,no one is perfect we make mistakes,but we have to take our mistakes seriously,and learn frm them
I agree with most of what ur saying.
Do u know what a period or paragraph is?
That same Ohio State team scored 29 points against Purdue in OT and we scored 44. FIRE URBAN MEYER NOW!
I think we can. OSU has a dynamic offense and UN has a very good defense (I think there are top 10 against the pass). We were more than in the game, and actually owned the TOP through Denards injury. We just missed the Big play. Our unit for some reason isn't as good as last year, whether it is due to the OL or Fitz. Our WRs are dropping passes that hit them in the hands. Lets be patient and let them get the players and experience needed to really run their targeted offensive scheme before we start talking about hot seats.
doesn't mean sh*t if you can't put the ball in the end zone. The last two games have been unwatchable from an offensive standpoint.
If you are going to compare how Ohio did against Nebraska compared to us then I 'll compare how Ohio did against Purdue at home with how we did against Purdue...how teams did against other teams means absolutely nothing.
It's not your fault.
never made sense. There was no indication that Will believed what had happened with him to be his fault. No doubt he had been scarred, but there was no evidence of any kind that he was blaming himself for what had transpired. An "oscar grab" scene that never really rang true. Good performances, but it rang a little false to me.
I complain about Borges as much as anyone but he's not going anywhere anytime soon. Get over it.
I doubt Borges' seat will be that hot for another few years - he's not running the offense that he was brought on to do due to Denard's skillset and it won't be until he has proven his ability/inability to develop a pro-based attack in a few years that we will seriously be having this discussion.
In 2008, we said the same thing about RR's offense, and most people responded that he should adapt to the offense that he inherited. Funny that I don't really hear anyone else saying that and to be fair Borges inherited a hell of a lot more talent than RR did in 2008, at least offensively.
His point was that Borges has tried to adapt the offense. He just isn't very good at it. Borges is not running his offense at all, so the comparison to 2008 doesn't work.
I really don't understand you. You'll say something hilarious that will have me metaphorically rolling in the aisles. And then you unleash the dragon with a string of terrible, flamebaitish posts.
BRX, my friend, BRX.
Once you go fat you don't go back. Also, Rodriguez was of Spanish descent not Hispanic...gringo....
He wasn't wrong. He is silly, but he wasn't completely wrong.
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.
is also kind of fat now.
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
Drew Breise. He was awesome at Purdueis.
Drew has become decidedly more French since moving to NOLA
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.
Honestly thought the only real terrible throw belomy had was that interception. It looked like the receiver was open and he just didn't have enough juice on it. A lot were drop balls and he was getting rushed left and right cause our oline is far from Alabama.
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.
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.
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.
Just lol at comparing the offense Al inherited to lemons.
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.
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.
Like others have said above, I completely agree with you.
Maybe but with a strong blitz coming at you every play you need to have short, quick passes that exploit over aggressive defenses. We didn't seem to do that....why not?
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.
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.
You know who isn't on the hot seat? Stevie Brown, kid has been making plays ever since he got called up. He's had 4 INT's in 6 games
Stop the internets. I want to get off.
It's kinda my thing...(Goldmember).
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.
Darrell Funk is one of the best Oline coaches in the country. I think losing Molk has had a negative impact that is beyond measure.
Molk could single handedly elevate those around him with his play. He is very much missed.
I award you all of the points.........
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Look at all those MAC offers. Horrible.
was a 5 star running back. How'd he turn out?
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.
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.
Or not very well coached.
Or not very well coached.
So all of them have just gotten worse as they've gotten older? Do you realize how dumb that sounds?
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?)
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.
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.
all these words on all these threads and you've nailed it....NAILED IT!
Thanx for paying attention.
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.
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?
is a ridiculous response. Have you ever hired a lawyer that sucked? Have you ever had a doctor botch a procedure? Have you ever had a mechanic fuck your car up even worse? Somebody holding a position does not make them good at their position. Ask yourself why Borges is journeyman. Ask yourself why his only head coaching offer in his 30 year career was from Portland State. You can drink the cool-aid but don't get addicted to it. There should be some alarms going off man.
we should only hire coordinators with HC experience. Like Greg Robinson. FIRE MATTISON!!
The hot seat?? he is not on the hotseat in any way. He has two choices, one is run his traaditional style football with all the wrong players, and his other is to try and run an offense he's had no experience with at all so what do you expect?
Other than his first year at Auburn, when he inherited a first round pick at QB and two first round picks at RBs, he has a decade and more of failure with (the wrong) players. Perhaps instead of waiting for a once in a generation talent windfall that Borges might not screw up, we could find an OC who has not regressed or failed at every job he has had? Funny how Holgerson in year one at West Virginia, RR at Arizona, etc., etc., are able to show good first years (and showed progression in offense at their former stops), and Al seems to get a pass as we wait for the next Jason Williams, Cadillac Williams, and Ronnie Brown trio to show up so we can witness the Gulf Coast Offense. Why don't we go after Gerry DiNardo, one of Al Borges' bosses in his many and varied journeyman career, while we are at it? Surely with the right players Gerry DiNardo would have had success.
How old are you?
You sound like a youngster that doesn't get how this is supposed to work.
A-Hire a tenured coach who is supposed to know how to use the talent given to him.
B-Pay him a good salary to do so.
C-Expect him to do just that.
D-Denard (Being ruined by Borges)
E-Denard (Being ruined by Borges)
F-Denard (Being ruined by Borges)
Thank God there are only a few letters left in the alphabet.
Denard was injured. RS freshman Bellomy struggled. The offense has been hot and cold this year, but not Borges hot seat cold.
Wasnt throwing air mail and one hoppers last night. That was Bellomy.
Are you going to now tell me he coaches the qb's to throw the ball not at the receivers?
tell you that your eyes are correct, not your heart. OK, Bellomy and Borges are the plan next year. Are you comfortable? Did last night set your mind at ease? OK, I have touched a nerve, but because I am right, not because my take is that riducolous. I repeat, ND, MSU, UN, , 27 points total. Senior QB. You good with that?
Ah, yes. The "everyone hates my post because I'm so right" explanation.
Borges has been here two years. In Year 1, we won a BCS game with an offense that, over the course of the season, outperformed all reasonable expectations. In Year 2, the offense has played poorly against three spectacular defenses (Bama, ND, MSU) and after Denard got hurt when the RS freshman Bellomy got his first real playing time - at night - in Lincoln, Nebraska. Yet we're still nicely positioned for a Rose Bowl run, all while in our supposed rebuilding period.
Firing people the second that things don't go well is not a recipe for stable, long-term success.
If you think we were going hang 30+ on them then you've got some issues. And how much of that
How much of that Neb game did our senior qb play?
The one thing that does frustrate me is if Bellomy is really that bad, why did they stop giving Gardner reps at QB? Hopefully Bellomy's awful game yesterday doesn't represent how good he actually is because if he realy is that innacurate then they should have kept Gardner as a backup QB as well as a WR- especially since they know Denard is so prone to injury. A 5 year old kid literally would have had a better game than Bellomy if he had taken a knee every single play. It was emberassing
If there is any new criticism (if anything the playcalling was better since we ran play-action off the inverted veer stuff we actually run for the first time), this is it. Not sure who all made that call but it seems pretty mind boggling that they were so high on Bellomy, especially after all the 2 QB carousel stuff that went on last year just to give Gardner more opportunities in the passing game. And to then not give Gardner a chance with the game on the line after Bellomy had produced one yard of offense in six possessions was just a gut punch.
did they stop giving Gardner reps at QB when he hurt his shoulder against ND? Up to that point we were hearing that he was getting full reps; I haven't heard a word about that since.
Maybe he isn't available to play QB because he can't throw, at all.
Is Devin Gardner still taking reps at quarterback?
“Yep, he is on a daily basis.”
Thanks, I missed that.
It still leaves the possibility open that the shoulder isn't healthy enough to actually QB ("reps" might involve taking snaps with limited or no throwing, or his throwing might be extremely ineffective). This staff is pretty tight with injury information; that his throwing arm was in a sling a few weeks ago might not be unrelated to what (didn't) happen last night.
You said that his offensive philosophy against specific defenses has been outright baffling is too many to count on one hand, but didn't give one specific play or philosophy to prove your point. Is that too much to ask?
should probably be allowed a chance to coach a starting QB he recruited before he gets run out of town.
I am sorry, but this post is fucking moronic! The loss last night had absolutely nothing to do with Borges. The people on this board who have perpetuated this nonsensical idea are insane. We were first and ten inside the fifteen when Denard got injured. I have no reason to believe that we were not going to score a touchdown had he been in the game to finish that drive. Nebraska then turned the ball over in their own zone with about a minute left before halftime. Again, had Denard been healthy, I am quite confident we would have been able to put some more points on the board in that situation. Thus, with a healthy Denard, we go into the half up 13-7.
We were moving the ball pretty consistently in the first half. If anything, we were controlling time of possession and were in a possition to steadily wear down their defense in the second half. Outside of one possession, our defensive was playing extremely well and, with Denard in the game, we were winning the battle up front on both sides of the ball. Also, contrary to popular opinion on this board, our gameplan was NOT hyper-conservative in the first half; I thought we were doing a pretty good job mixing things up. It is not Borges' fault that our receivers dropped 500 passes in this game! That first bomb to Roundtree should have been caught, and the second bomb to Roundtree should have been caught as well.
If Denard did not get hurt, I honestly believe that this would have been a 10-17 point victory for us. We would have worn down their defense and our defense would have stayed fresh. We also would not have had the turnovers in the second half. WE DID NOT LOSE THIS GAME BECAUSE OF BORGES, WE LOST IT BECAUSE DENARD GOT INJURED AND OUR RECEIVERS DON'T HAVE HANDS.
You can bitch all you want about Hoke and Borges not playing Gardner instead of Bellomy in the second half. Fine. But when was the last time you attended practice? For all we know, Bellomy might be the better quarterback right now. Bellomy might be throwing the ball really well in practice. Also, maybe our receivers really suck, and we need all the help that we can get at that position. Even though Gardner isn't very good at receiver, maybe the coaches felt that it would be too detrimental to the receiving core to move Gardner to quarterback.
*sorry for typos and misspellings . I don't have spell-check.*
I think the OP puts more than just last night's offensive performance at issue. Six quarters of football, with Denard, and no TDs to show for it. Not saying I agree with the OP's conclusions, but that's where the OP is coming from.
Fucking moronic or just regular moronic?
"You have no reason to believe that we weren't going to score a touchdown.........", did u see the MSU game? - (moron)
"You are quite confident we were going to put some more points on the board......", did u see the MSU game? (moron)
"We were winning the battle up front on both sides of the ball.....", teams know when to blitz, they know when to create a shallow circle and contain the run and are willing to let us try to beat them with the deep ball because we've also ruined Roundtree and Gardner can't reach above his head. (moron).
"WE DID NOT LOSE THIS GAME BECAUSE OF BORGESS.......", so, when Denard goes out, who's job is it to prepare everyone else????(M=moron).
BTW - you're really relying on spell check?
full well this is a square peg round hole thing and will be willing to give Borges the benefit of the doubt.
Its obvious to me DR's injury has been an issue all year and that can explain a lot of he conservative play calling.
Conservative play calling isn't the issue. Turning your back to the defense and throwing a tunnel screen out of the I formation is way more dangerous than quickly getting the ball out to a receiver from the gun. All the deep downfield passes Denard has attempted the last two years aren't conservative. Making those throws more difficult by not forcing linebackers and safeties to defend the perimeter consistently or running credible play action isn't safer or more conservative. No one is upset that we run it more than we throw it. That is just good business. The problem is that the structure of the offense makes everything more difficult, except in theory maybe some downfield throws that a quarterback like Denard isn't going to make as consistently as one of Archie Manning's kids.
The problem is we could be doing things way more conservatively and having more success.
If as Hoke always emphasizes, the primary goal is the Big 10 championship, my fundamental beef with Borges is that his goal seems to be installing the offense of the future with a group of personnel that can't operate it. In order to win the Big 10, Borges needs to be running an offense that makes the best use of the personnel that he has. Square peg round hole redux I know, but Borges actions simply don't seem to support the stated goals of the head coach.
Either Hoke needs to revise his goal to "win the Big 10 some year down the road when our system is in place with players we have recruited" or Borges needs to get on board with Hoke and play the cards he has been dealt.
Not sure if you are asking (1) should he be on the hotseat or (2) will he be on the hotseat. The easier question to ask is #2 which is definitely "no". Hoke is not throwing him under any bus anytime soon.
As for should he be, I think it is also pretty clear that the answer is no.
First, look at the 2 games you are talking about with no touchdowns. Ths MSU game, Borges admitted he chose to call a conservative game. His philosophy was that against that defense and with your strength on defense, you call a conservative game, avoid turnovers, and you win a low scoring game. And in the end, that philosophy worked. It was close, and it was not pretty, but it worked. You do not fire a coordinator for that.
The Nebraska game was all about losing Denard. Hardly Borges' fault. You want to criticize him for not having the backup QB ready? For not recruiting a backup QB? Eh, I can't argue with those critiques, but again, I hardly think those are firable offenses. To say that the offense with Denard was going to do nothing against Nebraska-- that is an unsupportable statement. I could just as easily say that we were going to light them up for 40 points in the second half.
Coordinators are fired for refusing to adapt, refusing to learn, refusing to change when things do not work. If Borges has shown anything, it is that he is willing to learn from the past. He has been criticized for throwing too many deep balls, and now for not throwing enough deep balls. As long as I continue to see him adapting the offense, I for one am more than happy to have him here at Michigan. You clearly feel otherwise though.
Now I don't have to type what you said in a much less coherent way.
I don't think Borges should be on the hot seat either, BUT:
Through 25 minutes, every other team Nebraska has played this season had at least 7 points, excluding Arkansas State and Idaho State. We had 3 points.
Now, we were driving, so maybe we get that touchdown, but all the same, its dismal to think that Southern Mississippi was tied with those guys 14-14 at the same point in the game.
When you add that fact onto the Notre Dame and MSU games, it becomes concerning.
I also agree that losing Denard was obviously the reason we lost last night. The big question going forward will be: Why did Bellomy, in a close game that we were clearly in till late in the 4th quarter, play to the finish when it was clear after 4-5 drives he wasn't up to it? Why wasn't Devin Gardner at least given a shot to bring the team back?
I would think that that is Hoke's final call, but between the two of them, how Bellomy did not come out of the game is baffling.
Oh, without a doubt there are issues with the offense which need to be addressed. Still, we were driving, and I am not sure that "most points through 25 minutes" is a useful offensive metric (though I understand why you are picking that).
As for not putting Devin Gardner in, I really think it is because he had not been practicing at QB. We can all talk about how he has played QB in the past and theoretically he should know some of the playbook, but I just think there is no way that any coach would put in a player that had not been getting the reps and gameplanning for the current game.
But according to Hoke he has been getting reps.
And, if we're trying to win the Big Ten, I just don't see how you don't at least try him. Doesn't make sense.
If he is getting reps, then it makes me wonder what he looks like in practice. As you say, we are trying to win the B1G championship- it is all that Hoke talks about, so there has to be some reason that he was not put in. The only things I can think of is that he looked awful in practice, or this shoulder injury is keeping him from being effective (or both).
But even then: Could he have possibly looked worse than Bellomy did during his first 5 drives last night?
Unless someone comes out and says Gardner simply can't throw right now, that was a woeful error by the staff.
Actually, I was watching the post-game presser. It looked like Hoke said Gardner was not practicing at QB over the last week at least.
of mine, how bad did it need to get before a change was made? If that is what Bellomy iw, he cannot possible play again, at least not right now and not until he makes some serious progress in about every facet of his play. He is not a viable option at quarterback right now. I don't think Michigan can win with him at quarterback, like at all, like not against Minnesota this weekend. If Denard cannot go this weekend or for any substantial period this season, Gardner has to play. Not to play him is to forfeit. That is what Saturday was. Essentially a forfeit.
The most unemployed offensive coordinators reading this blog!
All of us had at least as much OC work during 2008 as Al Borges (after his run at Auburn).
And plenty of posters have lasted here on this blog longer than Al has lasted at any job in the past two decades.
But this truly has become like Hollywood. It doesn't matter if you've directed 10 crappy movies; if you once made one that did fairly well, and other people have hired you, then you must not be that bad. Can I get a Greg Robinson amen?
I'd say warm is about as high as I would go with the Borges concerns. I mean seriously, is he getting enough out of our seriously underperforming RB, who can't run north/south for some reason? Or the O-line in general, which has seldom made real running lanes? Or how about the WR corps that is so mediocre our number 2 QB immediatley became our most athletic receiver? Yet still isn't that good at all?
Could you lay this all on Borges? Sure, but then you need to include the position coaches here too don't you? But let's get real, outside of Denard we don't have a lot of talent. The prediction before this season started was 7-5. In consideration of the pieces we lost and what we still have, that seemed a wise guess then and it seems a wise guess now.
Yes, position coaches should be evaluated and rewarded if they are good, and let go if they are not. This seemed like a fairly constant theme during the RR years. I don't seem why all of the assistants we brought over from San Diego State and/or Ball State should get a lifetime pass. We can see what good coaching has done with a ragtag group on defense -- the discipline, coordination, sound fundamentals, employed in a scheme that provides them a good opportunity for success. Not sure what positives we are seeing from the coaches on the other side of the ball.
One of the biggest bitches people had with RR was he didn't adapt to the personnel he had. Well Borges shouldn't be let off the hook either. His play calling the last 2 years has been less then spectacular. I also don't think Hoke should be immune either. ADAPT was the word used a lot. I'm not getting into a RR didn't do that, didnt get this. I'm just stating the facts. Its amazing the difference between the reaction from the two coaching staffs from the fans. There wasn't a good enough reason not to put Gardner at QB. I don't care if he hasn't practiced at QB or not. He's the closest thing to Denard. There was a big difference in NEB play calling on D when Drob went out and with Gardner I think they woulda had to respects Devins running ability more. Whats the worst thing that coulda happend. He throws a pick? Oh wait, that happend. Hoke and Co. need to ADAPT to they're personnel. Bellomy was awful and we are in the middle of a Big Ten championship run. Do whatever it takes to win. Isn't the reason Drob was on KO returns.
The reaction shouldn't be oh we are overreacting. This is a legitimate point. How are peolpe not concerned with Borges. Honestly I look at the games we have played and he lost us Iowa, almost lost us Virginia Tech, and almost lost us MSU. How many games can you look back at and say that Mattison lost us the game, or it didn't make sense what we were doing. Bama just out physicaled us, Air Force is impossible to prepare for in a week, and for Ohio State we loaded up in the box bc they did nothing all year. How many times can you say, oh I get what Borges is doing there.
It just seems to take longer for him to make adjustments. Nebraska is a bad defense, we should have a decent to good offense and should have scored last night. There are no excuses.
We stuggle with the O-line, we struggle at RB, we struggle at WR. Basically we have a sick running QB who isn't effective when there's no room to run. But, from what I'm seeing I'm much more concerned with our personnel than I am the playcalling with no real anwsers at these positions for next year either. O-line and QB have been addressed but will take time to develop. WR and RB are still a problem going forward.
No chance he's even close to a hot seat. We don't even have his ideal personnel to run his ideal offense yet. Should he adapt to Denard better? Sure. But if and when Shane is good to go, and we still have an anemic offense, than let's revisit this topic.
I didn't really know who Borges was before he came to Michigan and I didn't pay attention enough to UCLA, Cal, Indiana, or Auburn to evaluate him at those places. Looking back he was effective at UCLA & Auburn were he spent the majority of his time. I guess I agree with what some others are saying that at times I think he's right on and at times I see things to question.
I don't have a problem with the relatively conservative play calling in the MSU game based on our previous propensity to give up sacks, big losses, and turnovers the last time we played them. I do think we should have opened it up a little earlier last night especially in first and second down since we couldn't run the ball anyway and it would seem we'd have better chances trying to throw in early downs than on thrid and long. But, ultimately I'm not ready to judge him for another couple of years. I think every coach deserves a 3-5 year window within reason to get and develop the type of players that fit their scheme. Lets see what he does with Morris and the incoming and freshman O-line prospects.
When Denard got injured Michigan was inside the 10 down 4. I think Borges was doing ok up to that point, but my frustration is that he doesn't seem to have different packages/formations to play to Bellomy's strengths or at least to mask his weaknesses. As Brian has said, the effectiveness of up tempo spread teams is that they are able to use the little time they have to perfect simpler offenses. Backups get more reps and they are more prepared. My biggest disappointment with the offense when Bellomy was in is that it is clear he is not getting enough reps, and while the coaches keep insisting he can move, I would rather not see Bellomy running veer option plays or any plays where he is a run option. I cringe when I see Denard under center, but that is probably where Bellomy is best suited.
If you like the Lloyd Carr years, we're back to that.
I don't know, the National Championship wasn't so bad.
I'm not qualified to say whether Borges should stay or go, and I can tell you, I would hate it if outsiders who didn't know much about my industry made judgements on whether I should stay or go, but shouldn't we be concerned about our one-dimensional offense? Shouldn't we be concerned that the exit of Molk has made this big a difference? Shouldn't we be concerned that we have a bunch of running backs yet we never see them? I've read a couple of posts that said Bellomy doesn't have a "Big Ten Arm." Why did we recruit all these people who aren't quite good enough to play? Maybe I shouldn't compare Borges to Mattison, but didn't both really start in the same situation, with some players who didn't fit the scheme, were too small, not athletic enough, etc, etc. Mattison has pulled things together nicely. Why hasn't Borges been successful at creating a real Plan B, knowing that Denard is great, but sometimes he''s not?
I must have waded through 300 posts today before I got to one where someone made this honest admission. And it has me thinking: maybe everyone needs to have the experience, once in their life, of having their life's work analyzed on the internet by a blog full of people who aren't familiar with the industry and know nothing whatsoever about the position itself but are happy to criticize the work in terms that are laughably nonsensical to anyone actually familiar with it.
Maybe some lights would come on. But probably not.
I think he does deserve to fork over some answers as to why we seemingly have about 5 plays and about strategy. The bottom line is he gets paid well for his job, so naturally the scrutiny comes with it. You don't pay someone a lot of money and then expect them not to be accountable. College football is a big money business now and results are expected, plain and simple.
This thread is the epitome of over reaction. We're 16-5 since hoke and company arrived. Talking about anyone from that staff being on the hot seat or warm seat is ludicrous considering the players they're playing were recruited for a different system. Remember the last time that change happened.? 3-9, 5-7.
wow, people on this board jump the gun so much when things don't go their way. borges is working with a qb he didn't recruit, with a skill set he doesn't normally work with. lets revisit this if need be in 2-3 years when shane is under center. borges is essentially running the spread right now, which is not what he was brought here to do. he's catering to the strengths of his current players.
wow, people on this board jump the gun so much when things don't go their way.
Ya think? It's pathetic really, IMO. Everything is the fault of someone other than, you know, they guys that were ACTUALLY called upon to execute the play. I am not saying that there aren't times when a coordinator makes a bad call, but I don't think that is the case here. I think it's the fact that Michigan's offense lost many of it's key elements/leaders, and that makes for a severely limited offensive performance.
I think the expectations of the fanbase are ludicrously out of whack, and none more so than people in here that assume that Borges is incompetent because a RS Freshman QB couldn't win the game in a night game in Lincoln.
Get real people, Michigan is rebuilding, and last year was a minor miracle.
I have been saying this for weeks. He hasn't been able to run his offense yet. Russ or Shane will be better in his offense. He doesn't have the practice time to put in his offensive plays yet. He is still trying to run a hybrid style offense for Denard. Russ comes in to run Denard's and the defense can focus on the passing game and stop the running backs. We need to relax and move on to Minnesota.
As tempting as it is to agree with the sentiments expressed here, not just in the wake of the Nebraska loss, but also given that we haven't scored a touchdown in three weeks, it's way too early to be serious about this 'hot seat' talk, but maybe not too early to open a dialouge about it.
Michigan has not been impressive this year, or (with a couple exceptions) last year, against good defenses. Offensive game plans against Bama and ND were questionable (but against Bama, nobody has looked good the last two years). And Bellomy looked like a deer in the headlights--when losing Denard to injury has been a consistent risk the last three years. Most daminginly: an offense led by Denard Robinson has looked boring and predictable this year.
But firing the offensive coordinator is not where Michigan wants to go as a program in the foreseeable future. This conclusion assumes we'll win a couple more, at least, this year, but it's the wrong message to send when the team has been winning. Apart from the agony of watching TD-free football, 5-3 is about where the schedule suggested we may be at this point in the year. And if Denard is healthy, we probably beat Nebraska like 18-17, on FGs, or something.
and no ones really done anything against the ND defense this year. I was figuring OU was going to win this game by a couple of TD's - experienced veteran QB, solid skill players, a coaching staff that had been together for a while. What happens - 13 pts total and only 6 through 4 quarters.
I have started, begrudgingly, to see parallels between ND 2012 and Michigan 1997/Ohio State 2002. I am not a fan of ND, but I am a fan of that style of play.
Last week, I looked at the RCMB blog and Sparty fans definitely want their OC fired. Here, a good portion aren't keen on Borges. How about the two schools simply trade OCs and we can all be happy?
So please put me in the camp of 'Borges should definitely not be on the hot seat right now.' Here are the arguments for why Borges sucks, and my reasoning as to why this doesn't warrant a hot seat just yet:
-"He's not adapting to his personnel, and we're suffering as a result" - this one is silly. We're building a long-term program here, not something that should work best for just this year's personnel. Sometime hopefully soon, the personnel will match the plan, and the players will know the plays because that's what we will have been running all along. When the time comes, running the plays now and next year will have prepped the team for the ultimate game plan. The transition costs will be lower then and we'll all be happier as a result. The argument that 'oh but we crusaded against Rich Rod for not adapting to his personnel so we should go after Borges too' is stupid because those criticizing RRod then were wrong for the same reason 4 years ago. It doesn't make the argument correct today.
-"His QBs have regressed, and he is the QB coach, what does this mean for the future?" This is a legitimate concern but a data sample of 2/3 is to draw conclusions. Just as revelant are the jobs he's done with QBs at his other stops along his coaching career. I think the jury is out on this one and we should reserve judgment until he gets his prototypical QB under center. It may simply be the case that Denard can't handle the intricasies of the WCO, and maybe Bellomy is just a RS frosh who struggled on the road in a difficult night game environment (gasp!). If you think Borges should adapt and change the whole offense to fit these two guys, see my bullet point above.
-"His in game adjustments are lacking, and he doesn't scout what other defenses are going to do. He fails to put in adjustments for how guys attack us so we're in a constant schematic disadvantage." This one is harder to address but quite frankly, I find it somewhat laughable that we sit here, Brian included, going through Borges's plays and dissecting them one by one and thinking we could craft a better gameplan. I love picture pages and UFRs and all that but they are only helpful to a point. The fact is, we don't know when a play was blown up due to scheme or due to a blown assignment. Did the run blitz from the defense work or did Mealer bust a protection assignment? Did the route scheme in the passing play suck or did Gardner fail to sell the route when making his cuts? Without the all-11 film and multi year plus coaching experience, we may never know. Benefit of the doubt should generally go to a seasoned guy like Borges, all things being equal. He's forgotten more football than any of us likely will ever know. If you don't like the fact that he doesn't call enough bubble screens, tough shit.
You have to give guys a chance to succeed. I didn't like it when we ran Rich Rod out of town after 3 years and I don't think we should run Borges out after 2. At least give the guy a chance to put his players and his scheme into effect. Call me after 2014, if we're not getting it done then, I say can him. At least we can then credibly tell the next guy we will give him a fair opportunity to install his program.
Hoke and Hoke's staff have been a part of national champonships. Which is why we are on this blog and they aren't. If our overreaction and insanely obtuse commentary were the fabric from which our staff was cut - our team would suck - which it doesn't. It is rebuilding into a new system with a lot of young and inexperienced players.
Yeah the nice think about Hoke and Co. is from what I've seen, I'm fairly certain he ignores this sort of crap. He knows what he wants for this program, and the direction he's taking us. A few whiny fans aren't going to slow him down
"We're building a long-term program here, not something that should work best for just this year's personnel."
If that's the case, then let's all quit pretending that the team's goal this year is truly to win the Big 10 championship. The coaching staff preaches repeatedly about not looking beyond the next game, yet we are all talking about building for next year etc.
To think that we are going to win the Big 10 while not doing something that does work best with this year's personnel is ludicrous
Actually, we have a much larger sample size to look at. How did he do in years 2 - 4 at Auburn -- any QB progression? Two years at Indiana -- any QB progression? One year at Cal (canned before he should show any regression). Even in his second year in the Mountain West (where he landed after the SEC), his pro-caliber QB didn't muster a 58% completion rate. Yes, he has been in the football community a long time. But he has not been very successful, and his QBs and teams have not shown progression during his stints. Greg Robinson had two Super Bowls and a college national championship on his resume. Does that mean we could not criticize his defenses? I just don't see why people hope for something different from Borges when his history tells us he is not going to do well here long-term.
can you please provide the stats that show there was no progression with the QB's and teams. While you're doing that can you also provide how much turnover there was on the oline, wr's and position coaches during those years as well as any injuries that occurred during the year to the oline, wr's and QB that might have hampered the progression of the QB and the offenses.
The reason I ask about turnover and injuries is because if you look at completion % and QB rating, Chad Henne's best years were his freshman and junior years. Braylon Edwards was on the team in 2004 but not 2005. Also in 2005 Jake Long got hurt and missed most of the year. Then in 2007, both Henne and Hart battled injuries throughout most of the year.
Norte Dame's QB, Golston or w/e, is a redshirt freshman, and he seems to be playing pretty well. So I think concerns about Bellomy are justified.
Apples to oranges dude. First of all, there was a great deal of concern about the RS Fr. kid from ND at the beginning of the season. Remember, he got pulled against Michigan and Purdue because he was throwing INT's. Further, he's been starting, not coming off the bench. Bellomy, by contrast, has NEVER started a game, and was watching the senior QB move the offense well, then was suddenly thrust into the game, on a cold night, on the road, in a VERY difficult place to play.
You must have missed the drops by the receivers. Guess that was his fault too.
Al Borges shouldn't be on any kind of "hot seat". Until Denard went out Borges was having probably his best game calling plays all season (so glad we finally threw in some play action off the inverted veer and it worked out nicely). If Denard doesn't go out, we win that game easily.
On the other hand, are there structural problems that make our offense easier to defend than it should be and explain the huge dips in production we've seen from guys like Denard, Roundtree, and even Fitz this year (he is running to the sideline on those veer handoffs and yet people complain he's not getting north/south enough)? Yes. We don't run quick routes/screens because apparently they reflect some latent desire to touch another man's naughty parts. We have prototypical zone blockers pulling (and totally telegraphing the mesh point) and trying to drive block on most running plays so that Kyle Kalis can practice doing it during the week. We (usually) don't run credible play action and have no counters to what appear to be our base plays, and as a result teams are able to cheat against them without fear/punishment. This all results in more, tougher, downfield throws and runs where we are trying to block more defenders with fewer blockers.
And whoever decided Russell Bellomy was a better option than Devin Gardner may be a complete lunatic.
Not sure any of this impacts whether Borges and his system are an effective answer long term, but a great opportunity has been missed when just a slightly better performance on offense could have resulted in a 20-1 record over the last two years.
Listen, yes, gorgeous is no belichick. Hell, he is probably not even the right man for the job, I will give you that. But ya'll go off the deep end like nobody's business.
Was it more to you than just a game for entertainment? Does the game have any influence on how you operate on a day to day basis (save Ohio fans and some of ours)? I'm guessing no.
So for ya'll to come on here and bash a 20 year old kid and a coach who has been doing this for years (albeit not very good) is a little over the top.
Put the game behind you, enjoy the day, and for Christ's sake, chill out.
There are no words to describe how big an eye roll this thread deserves.
here here (rolling eyes)
1) This is not Borges' system, he really doesn't know how to run an offense with the players that we have, but he is doing it and not making excuses and/or complaining about it. I can respect it even though it's really ineffective.
2) Borges has been a journeyman coordinator for most of his career. I think you are seeing why. But that isn't something that we didn't know before. Deal with it.
It's like the haters who think Denard is bad for Michigan.
Who ever the fuck you want. If you want Matt Barkley, put on a fucking USC hat and stfu.
If you are a Michigan fan, root on your team.
Yeah, let's fire a competent pro style OC right after our spread QB graduates and our 5 star pro style QB starts his college career. Then we can be just like ND. In case people forgot, Borges did call a good game plan against Alabama and ND, if Denard had been Tom Brady. Even Brian conceded this. Now you want to fire him when Tom Brady 2.0 is about to enroll at Michigan? Can we fire you?
Shane Morris has the potential to be Tom Brady 2.0. Borges isn't doing a great job optimizing Denard, but my point is that it's stupid to fire him with Denard graduating this year. And let's not forget that offensive super genius Rich Rod wasn't able to "adapt to what he had."
I'm just really glad Hoke and Brandon don't listen in the slightest to you people.
He haven't done that in a long ass time. That buys him at least a couple seasons in my book. Nearly every fanbase in the history of ever has hated their OC. Even RR's offense getting blasted on this board when it put up a combined 24 points on OSU in three years. This isn't a criticism of RR, it's just to say that sometimes even good OC's don't always have good offenses and even good offenses don't always have good games. Everyone was nutting over Holgerson's offense at WVU and they just put up back to back 14 point performances-- they have scored exactly 7 more points than Michigan in the last two games, both of which were blowout losses. No OC is perfect, give the guy some time.
Or in other words, to the same output of Lloyd
Carr years. Some 10-2 and 11-1 sprinkled in there,
But Michigan is not going to dominate in the Big 10.
Last night was Michigan's opportunity to slam the door shut
And make reservations for Indy and probably Pasadena.
Nebraska is a very vulnerable team. They will not win out.
After the game Nebraska fans were shouting "Rose Bowl, baby!"
I'm afraid not.
Actually I disagree. Carr's problem was he game planned like he had a stud defense. The problem was more often than not he didn't. He had a good defense but not dominate. 2006 was the exception and yes UM did dominant the Big Ten until OSU.
Hoke and Mattison look like they are going to be putting a dominant defense on the field year in and year out. That right there will be different than most of the later Carr years.
For general consumption in this thread, the drop in production statistically has not been enough to raise alarms overall, if that's what the OP is getting at.
In 2011, we averaged 182.3 yards passing per game for the season. This year, it has fallen to all of 171.5 yards. We averages 206.6 yards rushing per game last year, and to date this year, despite what your eyes might see, that's actually up to 221.9 yards per game on average.
We averaged 404.7 yards of total offense per game last year, and although this is down to 378.1 yards per game this year, I don't think it is fair exactly to say that Borges is on the hot seat for what amounts to 26.3 yards per game less on average this year.
We graduated Molk, Huyge, Koger and Hemingway and took, overall, only a 6.5% hit in production, which really is not bad and certainly not enough to be an indictment on the offensive coordinator from that standpoint.
We're talking about an offense that is still in the midst of a transition, and as we were made aware in the beginning, the coordinator hires and subsequent recruiting patterns were a long-term solution, not an immediate fix. Questioning the playcalling is one thing as we all have different assessments of what we believe the personnel could realistically do, but "hot seat" talk after less than two seasons and what is not a huge drop in production, with the recruiting for Borges' WCO now in full swing, is simply not fair in my mind.
I guess I don't understand what the relevant metrics are for the OP.
This is such a ridiculous assertion that Hoke or DB would even consider firing a OC who, by both the HC and the OC own proclamation, wants to run entirely different scheme. Or at least I will throw a bone to the effect of they don't want to use so many spread elements consistently in their game planning.
It's pretty obvious that the team has flipped talent wise. The defense finally has play markers, though not enough to make us elite. Having said that, in my humble opinion, the offense is suffering from the transition the worst right now, because they don't have enough playmakers and/or talent plus depth to make us even productive. It sucks, but hopefully they will get it solved via recruiting and keep coaching them up.
There isn't a free agent system. It takes years to fix the problems we have. Deal peeps!
Offensively, all we need to do I point to SDSU/Ryan Lindey, the multiplicity Borges used there, and seriously rewatch that ND game. There is some real genius in the route patterns he used, problem is that if people will just admit it to themselves that Denard isn't capable of passing effectively on a consistent basis to use those schemes, you could handle this situation better.
And wholly shit, the coaches are probably kicking themselves for going after a top flight QB recruit last year. That could be troublesome next two years.
You are searching for a snowflake in the Sahara. Good luck!!
BORGES But it's so simple. All I have to do is divine from what I know of you. Are you the sort of defensive coordinator who would sell out to stop the base play or are sort of defensive coordinator who is moar concerned about a constraint play busting big? He studies the defense now. BORGES Now, a clever man would focus on using Denard to run the ball, because he would know that only a great fool would not use his best weapon. He would also know that I know that the defense would be stacked to prevent Denard from running so I can clearly not run Denard. Only a great fool would run Denard into the teeth of a defense designed to stop him. The defensive coordinator must have known I was not a great fool; he would have counted on it and planned on me calling a play action pass out of the same formation, so I can clearly not choose to call that. OPPOSING DEFENSIVE COORDINATOR You've made your decision then7 BORGES What's that over there? PLAY BEGINS He called a formation that Michigan has not run out of all year. Denard playactions to Toussaint fooling no one resulting in two defenders in his face as he sets to throw an interception off his back foot. ---DRIVE ENDS ONLY TO BE REPEATED ON THE NEXT POSSESSION
Comparing series where we had Denard (this includes the one where he was injured), we had the ball 19:54, for 39 plays with 185 yards. They had the ball for 9:15 with 24 plays and 133 yards. In my opinion, we were on our way.
Dont like his play callin at all. On the MSU 3 yard line ... we throw 2 or 3 times & flop.? Why dont we ever roll Denard out with the option to run or pass in that situation? Seems Denard would score almost every time in that situation
D's stack the box non stop & we run into it.
Denard runnin up the middle over & over & getting hammered. Only was a matter of time b4 he got injured. Why dont we run the speed option ever at least?
No screen passes over the top of a blitzing d ever to Fitz?
If these two monster O-Line classs we are getting are squandered and Morris fails to develop, then I'm fine with putting Borges on the hotseat. However no coaches go on the hotseat this year or next year.
For everyone bitching about the offense getting shut down, lets review a little shall we?
Illinois 38, Michigan 13
Ohio State 21, Michigan 10
Ohio State 37, Michigan 7
Mississippi State 52, Michigan 14
Those are some various scores compiled by an offensive staff designed to utilize spread QBs to their fullest potential and running the scheme with Tate and/or Denard. Yet somehow we only managed to find 13 points against Ron Zook one year, let alone Tressel and some middle of the pack SEC team shutting our ass down cold.
At the end of the day the spread has a component that requires the defense to make some mistakes that you then exploit with your speed. Which of course is why most people think it won't work in the NFL (the defenses don't make mistakes and can match the offense in terms of speed). Denard has show he can't be a pocket passer and defenses are making fewer mistakes against them as they get the benefit of experience in playing him (plus more film for the coaches). So when we play well coached defenses that don't make many mistakes we have problems with the spread flavors of our offense.
This offense was not some scoring machine that Borges fucked up. It always has been a somewhat unreliable machine that had hiccups and shit the bed on occasion. Borges is trying nurse the machine across the finish line, while also recruiting what we hope is RoboHenne 2.0 and some big outside WRs as opposed to relying on the Gallon/Dileo cloaking devices being functional. We have a working defense, the recruits that in theory allow us to install the system Borges wants. If he fucks that install job up, then yes he's on the hot seat. So long as he recruits well and the install job looks on progress, don't fuck up program stability just because an offense centered around a running QB, a style of offense we have no intention of maintaining is having hiccups.
You are comparing two games with a true freshman Tate Forcier at QB and two with Denard as a true sophomore without a guy like Fitz standing next to him and a freshman left tackle to what should be expected of the same group of players with two more years of development.
And it looks like in all of those games the team managed to score at least one touchdown.
Stanford is 5-2, their coach says they have the best defense in the entire history of the school, and they haven't given up more than 17 points to anyone in regulation. Except when they played an Arizona team that went 4-8 last year, had to replace an NFL QB, their leading rusher, and their top three receivers, all while dealing with multiple injuries along the offensive line. Then they gave up 48. No team has scored more points against 5-2 USC either. Or 5-2 Oklahoma State (59). Or 6-1 Oregon State (35, next closest is 24 from BYU but in that game the Beavs D added a score of their own). Or Washington (52, just like Oregon, but the Wildcats won by a larger margin).
All the talk about transitions and fits is just talk. Acting like the spread offense is some crazy shit that doesn't work against everybody when you have a little bit of talent/experience is just lunacy.
You're certainly right that Al Borges shouldn't be on the hot seat, but to act like he hasn't underperformed or that no one could do better with this current squad is just silly.
Cannot wait till Alabama destroys Oregon in the NC game so the spread crazies can try and rationalize it. Should be most entertaining.
Clearly not winning the national championship this season would mean that Oregon is fucking up by playing in an offensive system that has allowed them to go 41-6 the last 3.5 years and win their conferece three years in a row.
Remind me how many national titles we've won in the last 60+ years and what happened the last time we played the Ducks.
Here, we'll be busy analyzing the 49 points Arizona will have put up on New Mexico in the Gildan Bowl.
Its kind of crazy that your hatred of the spread has mutated to the point you would rather see Nick Saban win another NC than witness its ultimate success.
You mean the way MANBALL crazies ignore Florida 2006 & 2008, Texas 2005, and Auburn 2010?
Obvious obvious is obvious.
a big zero on Oregon. Even good offenses, spread or otherwise, shit the bed sometimes.
There is a difference between underperforming and claiming that someone could do better. Only a fool would claim that no one could do better with the offense. But only a fool would think that a West Coast guy was going to be able to best maximize the talents of a spread roster. Borges has performed about in line with my expectations. The offense has had 4 bad games. Three were against top 10 defenses, two of those on the road, and one was with the superstar QB hurt. People need to calm the fuck down.
How's anyone doing against Oregon?
Sanity. It still exists. Thanks for throwing some sobering cold water on the faction of the fan base hats still on a drunken bender.
God, this is one of the dumbest long smart-sounding posts in MGoBlog history.
Look, I am as disappointed in our offense as anyone. 8 freaking quarters without a TD? General incompetence and inability to put together sustained drives? It's been a shit show. Bit fire Borges? Let's step back and look at things rationally, starting with the roster:
1) Denard may be the fastest, coolest, nicest, most awesome guy on the team, but he is not a complete qb and as a result, decent or better defenses consistently stop him. This is nothing new - he had the exact issue since 2010 under a coach that practically create an offense designed for his particular skill set. At the end of the day, Denard is a great runner (although he misses obvious lanes), but a terrible decision maker, an inaccurate thrower and a poor manager of the offense. Does he dominate against crappy teams - yes, 100% of the time. But teams with better talent stop him cold. This is not on Borges.
Backup - Bellamy. Not sure how the inability of a low-rated redshirt freshman qb to step in and play we in a nigh game in Nebraska is on him. The onl y thing that is his faul is not going to Devin at some point when it was obvious that Bellamy was not getting it done. Why not take a shot with a guy that can at least run, especially since was doing nada at WR anyway.
Our best WR is a 5'8" (generous) gallon, followed by an even smaller Dilio. We have a converted qb playing the position a well. This is the least talented group of Michigan wideOuts I have ever seen. How is it Borges' fault that guys who are smaller and slower and less athletic can't get separation against decen DBs?
Sorry, I know that fitz had a great 2011, but he is clearly not getting it done in 2012. Just doesn't look fast or elusive. His backups are the microscopic and slow v. Smith (awesome blocker though), the even smaller true freshman Norfleet, and a couple of middling sophomores. We do not have a guy who can carry the ball 5+ times and put up 100+ consistently. This allows teams to cheat onto Denard. The lack of a non-Denard runnig game has plague us for 3 years now. Not on Borges.
The funchess has a ton of physical potential. But he is a raw freshman who is too skinny to block tight now. Behind him is another true freshman who is too lumbering to go downfield and a senior who is just a guy.
Aside from Lewan, who on this line will even be considered Goethe draft? And, we lack any upperclassman backups.
Basically, this is the most talent depleted Michigan offense I have seen since nick Sheridan was running the show. It is not Borges fault. Give him time and we will e fine.
One caveat: none of what I said above will change if we cannot close the deal on some op skill position guys. We still have not signed on a top Wr or rb under hoke. Hope that this changes with treadwell and Greene.
1. Denard Robinson's completion percentage has plummeted since his sophomore season while his INT rate has skyrocketed. Just saying, "Well, he's not that great anyway" doesn't explain the inverse to just about every quarterback's career ever taking place. People complained about pegs and holes when freshman Steve Threet put up a nearly identical season to freshman Ryan Mallett. Everyone should be alarmed when the starting quarterback gets less good as his career progresses.
2. Funny how you don't even mention a guy who put up 900+ yards as a sophomore to lead the team. Seems one coaching staff had him playing at an all-conference level (2nd team, media) as an underclassman. Another has made him nearly invisible as a junior and senior. Did Roy Roundtree get suckier the last two years somehow? Or is your baseline for his and any other player's performance not what they have actually accomplished on the field in the past, but rather making excuses for not coming close to those prior benchmarks?
3. Is the running back situation better than it was in 2010?
4. If your tight ends can't block, you don't have to make them do it. Honest. Lots of teams run offenses that would just let Funchess line up in the slot, snatch balls over linebackers heads and dance into the end zone. No past or pending legislation requires any team to line up with a tight end if that is a weakness.
5. The 2006 offensive line produced one draft pick (Long a year later). The 2003 line produced 2 (Baas a year later and Pape with one of the final picks). Pape never made a roster, though he did kick ass in NFL Europe according to Wikipedia. All of our starting linemen (the only ones who play) are upperclassmen. Four are returning starters. Four were 4-star recruits coming out of high school. Their offer lists are full of teams currently ranked or who had recent success.
It's late, I'm tired and the Tigers just surrendered the only lead they've had this entire series so I'm just going to go with I agree with Purple Stuff, upvote all his comments and call it a day....
but, to be fair, sometimes players do regress over time without any discernable coaching incompetence to explain it. It's not common, but it's not a gross anomly. Henne, for example, had an uptick in interceptions in his senior year despite significantly fewer attempts. His completion percentage dropped as well. Some of that is injury related, but Denard was hurt last year too. Tebow had a lower QB rating his senior year than his previous two years. Colt McCoy performed significantly worse in his senior year (+ 4 ints, - 7 tds). On the WR end, Breaston had two mediocre years sandwiched between excellent sophmore and redshirt senior years. Avante had a junior year slump. Crabtree had 800 more receiving yards his freshmen year than his sophmore year.
I'd agree that this group isn't been used to their fullest potential, but I'm not convinced that coaching/coordinating is to blame for every instance of a player for Michigan not playing as well this season as they did in past seasons.
Re: OL. I think the guy your replying to is foolish to think the OL starters lack talent, but the OL does lack depth and I think a lack of depth does affect the how the starters play. But the bigger issue is that the line is replacing the former best center in the country. I think Molk's departure was a much, much, bigger loss than most anticipated.
The biggest issue we have on offense is that we have one playmaker and defenses realize this. Funchess is a weapon, but underutilized. Fitz isn't getting the creases he had last year. Some of the issue is with the O-line, but we lost a monster in Molk.
Here are my two cents, which I can tell the internet is clamoring for.
I'm unsure why Fitz is getting nearly all of the carries. He hasn't produced this year. He's not fast enough to get to the outside; he's not breaking tackles; he's not making guys miss. Well, people say, the OL isn't blocking as well as it was last year. I agree. However, if the yards aren't readily available it might be time to try a guy like Rawls, more of a bruiser, to just take a one yard gain and turn it into three. I get the whole lateral movement thing on the veer, but it doesn't seem like Fitz is hitting holes w/ speed or power this year. I'd like to more of Rawls. I think the production has been poor enough to warrant at least a split in the carries.
It doesn't look like the OL is as good as last year. Michigan, post Notre Dame, has kind of gone into a shell offensively. This was the first game that they used effective play action to push the ball down the field. The I-Form run on the third down early was a horrendous call. However, that happens. I was happy to see that slight change. It seemed like they really needed to push the field vertically to get those safeties out of the box. They aren't getting big plays in the running game, and they aren't scoring.
I've been a fan since the early nineties, and I mostly remember M having at least one guy who could get open. They don't seem to have anyone at WR who can consistently beat someone over the top. Granted, Denard isn't the most accurate QB, but we're not looking at Manningham, Edwards, Howard, or Alexander level separation. The WR's often seem to be pretty well covered. I miss stud WR's. I also miss stud RB's. I wish that Michigan had a better back up QB, but I saw Navarre in person at UCLA in his RS freshman season, and I remember watching Mallet against Wisconsin. Unfortunately, other than Robo Henne, it's tough to play QB well out of nowhere. In long, more excellent RB's and WR's.
The offensive running game seems to be built around:
running the back sideways, and
Denard countering North-South
The problem with that is that it seems to be designed around the Q-back.
Why do you want your running back running sideways?
If Denard is injured,
a sideways running back is not much of a threat with a backup quarterback in the game.
Build a solid offense, make the players play to that, not one built around a single player.
That is the way the M defense is developing.
Just like RR, Al Borges gets a grade of "incomplete." I'm a spread fan myself, but I really don't think anyone here is qualified to judge Borges' performance until he has his own seniors on the team.
If the WCO is still struggling with a junior Shane Morris at QB, or of Ohio and ND start walking on Michigan the way Oregon did with their spread, then I will start to be concerned. Really, though, nobody can say with any degree of certainty right now whether or not Borges' system will allow Michigan to compete for a Big Ten Championship and/or a playoff spot on a regular basis.
I think that whenever the team struggles even a little bit, some of the posts look way too much like those on RCMB. Maybe some of us should pretend we've seen adversity before.
Al Borges had a sound game plan against Alabama, and it wasn't conservative. We just didn't have the quarterback or the receivers to win in one-on-one man coverage against Alabama's DB's. So far, no one has. Not a single team has put more than fourteen up on Bama since FCS Georgia Southern a year ago.
Al's gameplan against ND was insanely aggressive. Michigan punted once in the entire game. His plan was to try to pick on a young Notre Dame secondary. It didn't work, probably wasn't very smart, so he adjusted to a Denard-based running game in the second half. We call that gameplan the whole game, Michigan probably wins.
Against Michigan State, Al Borges' game plan WAS play not to lose, and he admitted as much. When you're going up against an offense as inept and a defense as great as MSU's, that gameplan actually makes sense. Also, we happened to win that game, putting up 50 yards of offense and five points less than all-world spread guru Urban Meyer.
The Nebraska game, well, I don't know. Before Denard went out, it was almost the end of the first half. We were inside the ten, we had three points against a team that had performed badly on defense against nearly everyone on their schedule. That's pretty damning right there, but I'll await the UFR to see what was going on.
So what you're saying is: yes I know Denard got injured and yes I know Bellomy was completely ineffective and yes I know our O-line is mediocre and yes I know we have some talent coming in that's better suited to Borges' offense, but I AM STILL ANGARRR.
As a side note, who are the hottest pro-style coordinators in college football right now? Say that we were to replace Borges with another pro-style coordinator, who are the top guys in college football right now? Who would you like to see?
Brady should have considered hiring a offensive coordinator that specializes in the spread. He is the one that decided to hire a pro style OC to run a spread. That would be like hiring Chip Kelly to run a pro offense. Also, Hoke decided to gamble on moving Gardner from QB to WR. The head coach is responsible for offensive and defensive philosophies and what coaches he hires to teach these philosophies. I'm not going to get all crazy and say coaches need to be fired until after year three. Lets see how the offense does when they actually implement their preferred system.
Why would Brady Hoke hire a spread OC when he has no intention of running the spread?
Should he have hired this spread OC just for 2 years until Denard graduated and then switched directions that way?
Everyone knew that when Hoke was hired the "spread was dead" at Michigan. The staff came in and tried a bunch of pro-style, WCO stuff last year and mixed in some spread concepts to ease the transition. It didn't work that well so they moved to more spread stuff and now mix in WCO stuff. In other words they are attemtping to adapt to the current players. They just aren't doing a very good job. I dont know if thats because Borges and Hoke don't want to teach any more spread concepts since it will likely leave when Denard graduates, or if Borges is just in over his head with an offense he is unfamiliar with and therefore cannot even scheme against a simple scrape exchange.
I agree even before Denard went down the offense sucked. We might have been able to get the one touchdown with Denard but that is against a Nebraska defense that gave up 63 pts. to Ohio. I assume Bellomy plays much better in practice because if that is what they are looking at in practice, I don't think Gardner would be a WR. I realize that Denard and Borges style of plays are clashing but at Michigan we should have great coaches and great coaches get the most out of the players they have that is why RR is a good coach but not a great coach because he just runs a system.
even before Denard went down the offense sucked
What game did you watch? This is the crap that is so frustrating about Michigan's fanbase (at least in here). Denard had completed passes downfield (one was called incomplete) to Tree, and had moved the ball into the redzone. I am not saying they were going all Oregon on Nebraska, but to say the offense "sucked" is hyperbole, to say the least.
I think everyone should just calm the heck down. We thought coming into the season that the defense was going to be a liability, and the offense was going to be the strength. Well, it's turned out the opposite. Things happen like that sometimes. Unlike many of you, I have complete faith in Hoke & Co. to do what is necessary to move the team along. It's very easy to sit back as fans and criticize the coaching staff for the problems that we see every game. But, if we see them, you can be damn sure that they see them -- and if they see them, you can be damn sure they're trying to fix them. Fans act as it fixing issues is like flipping a switch. They call for another RB to replace the starter, but have no idea what is going on behind the scenes. Imagine if someone came into you workplace, saw a problem in your operation, and then started calling you an incompetent idiot for not making what THEY see as the appropriate adjustment(s). They don't know your business (although they think they do), they don't know the strengths and weakness of your personnel (although they think they do), and they're not going to be held accountable for the success or failure of any changes.
I love discussing Michigan football as much as anyone. But all this belly aching is really pathetic in my mind. The offense is struggling, and it is frustrating. But, let's give the guys who run the program the benefit of the doubt, because YOU might thing the solution is obvious, but each and every one of us is operating at a near COMPLETE lack of information.
To put it succinctly: this is going to get much, much worse before (if it ever) gets better. The "this will never, ever be a pass not even one time out of a hundred WR package" has already returned. Hoke has shown this season that whatever supposed acumen he displayed for clock management and controlled aggression last year was a mirage. Down 14 with 7 minutes left? We don't need no hurry up, fergodsakes.
In fact, the word from Schembechler Hall is this weeks installation consistes entirely of fitting Kerridge's helmet with a megaphone so he can scream at opposing defenses, "Hey morons, I'm motioning this way! The run is going here!"
im not here to bash my team,yes i am very frustrated as any fan would be who loves there team when we see things go up in smoke ,but i will still express my opinion,lets be very clear there definatleyhas been some poor coaching desicions as of late,first borgess playcalling has been gettin louzy for last 2 games,,also coach hoke what are u still trying to get oughta tousssaint ,what game are u watching..umm obviously not him, cause u shoulda done pulled or at least let rawls play more snap or some series of plays,to me you actin like this aint happening , u throw blame on your o line, ok i can see some plays ,but mostly its been his inactiveness to hit his marks,shame on you hoke for this coaching error,i like hoke alot,and believe he can get job done for michigan,but he has to be honest to himself and to team and us as fans,and we all correct me someone please if u feel im wrong about this seen toussaints performance goin down slumps even to this day and what we are at game 6-7..are u kidding me,i respected you ,and i do believe in u, but these things are gettin a lil crazy to watch..and i dont wanna be like wtf on you too,its time to start looking inside what u need to fix on offense, and get settled quick,help me if not alotta fans confidence that you are a coach who will make the nessary changes we need to suceed,,i know as a coach you are trying to set good foundations here,and truly believe these kids like you..u have set your standard frm day one,to win big ten,and u know most of us knew we might still have 2 wait another year,hopefully not 2,but anyways,but this kinda of desision making shoulda been corrected better than that non chalant excuses you keep makin for toussaint,we know what he is capable of but like denard(sorry bad comparision denard better at run)when its not working ya gotta look for somethin else ,u have a big ten legend contender squad ,and this coaching u and borgess are about to drop the ball if ya dont loosen up and get ahold of this now!!,as of defense greg mattison has done his part in preparing week in week out,no one should be complaining about our defense i still believe we have best defense than any big ten school,and u know why its the way they play together ,the way they are coached on mastering technique, this offense might need this same thing , just dont know if borgess can get them on the next level to get his side to work harder to get to balls,hold lines longer for the qb to make good throws,but also a coach at his position to call plays that move chains efficently,and who aint scared to try to let if fly a lil more ,im prayin for the best , but its gettin late season,we need to wake up now no more excuses, exicute....GO BLUE FOREVER
Holy core dump! NEEDZ MOAR COMMAS!
Run the spread, he's a west coast QB, some what mobile and a bigger QB.
Why was he running the zone read? He can't do it!!
Why on third and seven did Borges have him run the speed option? He can't do it.
Borges seems to have a nack this year for calling the perfect play for the other teams defense in big games.
The only thing that looked obvious was the coaches didn't have Bellomy ready to play. I'm sure he is a better QB than what he showed Sat night. He wouldn't be here if he wasn't.
We want to complain about our backup. It's been agreed that we were not ready for a plan B, But where in the world is Rawls.
I am tired of people complaining about our O line. They have had holes for Fitz, but for some reason he isn't hitting them. Try Rawls once in a while. He runs down hill and hard.
Funchess seems to make plays when he is called upon, but his number isn't called much.
Dileo saved our butts last week against sparty and he was invisible Saturday.
I love what Hoke and Co. have done so far, but if we want to play manball then play manball.
If Denard was hurt enough Saturday that he could not come back in the game, he more than likely will not be able to play next Saturday. If he does play, he is one right hand hitting the ground from being out again.
What an embarassing offensive perf Sat night. I hope we dont start losing recruits because of this.
Why not run denard on a speed option?? But we really need Denard for OSU - so hope we dont burn him up before that