stop fucking snakes. Seriously.
here's one vote for "John Beilein's head in a Futurama jar"
stop fucking snakes. Seriously.
If anything could bring the Michigan fanbase together, it's the threat of annihilation, right?
I'm scared of quicksand.
IS the elephant in the room. Sorry couldn't resist.
Same worries, but I think it will work out.
Great. Fat jokes about our coach. Everyday we become more and more like that religious school in Indiana we've had moderate success against the past few years...
coach was 2-1 against ND
Nothing personal...just one little fat joke and you guys negbang me? Good thing Uncle Phil wasn't hired.
He's going to have to learn to be a pocket passer, is what I gathered.
Makes me think he's going to be gone.
I felt there were two ways to interpret the press conference comments: (1) an offense will be built around his skills, taking advantage of his running ability (2) or his skills will be put to use at a different position. With Tate gone, and the chances of getting a QB who can step in and play, pretty slim, Hoke would have to be an idiot not to go with the first option.
Either way, I don't think they're going to turn him into a pure pocket passer. That option makes NO sense.
As a Michigan fan I hope Denard stays. But if he is asked to switch to a different position it would probably be best for Denard to leave and go somewhere his talents can best be used.
HTF is a OC with zero experience with such a thing going to make that work. It's all bullshit. I was with you right up until Hoke hired this OC. He has NO IDEA how to use someone like Denard as a QB.
Take one of these...
Do you have that in cherry flavor? Also is that a chewable? These are important questions for someone living in NambyPambyVille...
250000 mg? I hope you have a tasty beverage to wash that thing down; it's going to be like eating a biscuit.
His express statement that he would find ways to use Denard's dual thread ability wasn't enough for now?
I want him to be more explicit, just like I'm sure Denard does too. Does that mean moving Denard to slot receiver and running screen passes to him? Does that mean running the wildcat with him? Does that mean play action rollouts?
Hoke has never utilized a dual threat QB before so I think these are reasonable questions for him to address. Why is he bringing Borges with him in the first place? I'd like all these things answered ASAP.
Right now I'm content with Denard reportedly staying after a brief meeting, and the promise that they'll go more in depth.
Hoke isn't about to draw x's and o's at his introductory press conference. He hasn't utilized a dual threat quarterback, but the material is out there and shouldn't be hard for him to pick up.
Just give it time, I'm confident that between Denard, Hoke and Borges, they'll come up with several good answers given enough time.
Ugh. See the 3-3-5 and Gerg for the answer to that one...
Scheme vs. Plays.
Big, big difference.
Nobody expects or wants Hoke to come play zone-read option football. That's as ridiculous as the people who wanted RR to play Sheridan as a five-step drop back passer using LC's playbook. We hired a change, but he'd be an idiot not to adapt certain plays to use Denard's incredible running ability.
A rational thought from someone not dozing off after drinking all of the coolaid. His hire of Borges basically says "fuck you Denard" as a QB. He could have found someone with some spread experience and transitioned to a more of pro style offense. But instead he showed the exact same inflexibility as RR when he came in.
I don't think it's drinking Kool-Aid to say "wait and see."
What we know for now is Borges history (which admittedly is not a RR or Chip Kelly playbook), we know that Hoke and Denard have talked, and we have reports from the team indicating Denard is staying.
Why not wait until we have some actual answers before hitting the panic button?
Find me any examples of a pro style OC running a dual threat QB offense successfully. There may be some as I have not done the research, but as we saw with Gerg you can't expect coaches with zero experience with something to be great at it right away. If Hoke hires Smith as QB coach or someone like that then I will be encouraged but I expect another pro style hire that further marginalizes Denard.
I guess I am the only one that really enjoyed watching Denard last year at QB while everyone else pines for the likes of John Navarre.
We're not looking for an entirely new scheme a la Gerg. What Denard needs is some designed QB run plays. At the very least, Hoke can go look into Tressel's playbook with Pryor and copy/paste. Tressel's calling of those plays isn't anything like running a true dual threat QB, but there's no reason Hoke can't utilize them more.
I'm sure there are other examples, but like you I haven't done the research.
If Denard transfers, who gets pinned with all the blame? Hoke? DB?
If Denard leaves we have a 5 star QB waiting in the wings.
I know we all want to give Denard that warm fuzzy feeling to get him to stay, but at some point we might want to consider how to build up DG. Just sayin'
So you want to go with another basicly inexpierenced qb next year? We have one of the most electric athletes Michigan has ever scene. If they can't figure out a way to keap Denard at qb I will be pretty disapointed.
I think we should just let this play out before attributing blame. We have no idea about specifics of the offense. DB and Hoke both said they have a special talent in Denard and that will be important to adapt the offense around him. And teammates have all sounded extremely positive (almost certain) that he will be staying. RELAX.
FWIW, he is telling fans that he is staying. I don't know if that is PR on his part or if it is legit, but it is what he is telling people.
Can you read? Look at the OC hire that Brian wrote about. He has no idea of what to do with someone like Denard. I'm sure it will all turn out okay but don't expect a happy trouble free transition.
How about we just stop blaming and get on with our lives and look forward to next November when the Hokester elbow drops Tressell from the top row of Michigan Stadium? Blaming isn't going to help winning next year.
As of now, I'll blame you. Regardless of his decision (crossing my fingers he stays), we have to resist the urge to let it become a point of contention for our new HC and our recently un-pimped AD. Just roll with it, if he leaves wish him well, and let's look forward to 2011.
Anything good or bad with the football program is squarely pinned on DB. DB caved to the pressure and made a change, when a fourth RR year may have been the turning point.
Hoke is just a very lucky guy at the right place at the right time. He will just do his job as he knows how to do it. If he fails, the question will be "why was he hired in the first place".
This isn't 2008.2
We aren't losing an immense amount of NFL talent from the O side who have started for 2-4 years (Long, Henne, Hart, Manningham, Arrington, who else stuck?)
We're returning 9-10 starters. Talented starters. Having the pieces is at least as important as using the pieces. This time we won't roll SheriThreet out there behind a just-converted D-Tackle to throw it to freshmen and hand off to more freshmen.
Look at returning starters and take a deep breath
Talented spread starters. Everyone is trivializing the transition to a pro style offense much like the move to the spread - we thought RR would win 6-8 games his first year. Hoke has chosen to throw the baby out with the bathwater which is his prerogative, but I think he could have done a better job or transitioning offenses just like RR could have done.
I probably owe joeyb royalties or something...
He stole Hobbes from me.
I told you I was sorry and I would change my icon once everything died down. It hasn't died down.
It's okay, I forgive you. You may keep it, things never are goinmg to settle down.
That is a very revealing update.
I think that Hoke might be able to construct at least most of an offense with what is there now - key word here is "most". Give him a shot at recruiting his own sort of player on this one.
I'm REALLY Scared About Our Offense!
And that is a huge problem I have with the hire because up until Monday our offense was our strength. Now I am scared about all facets of the team.
I don't want to be "that guy" but our offense wasn't all that good when it mattered. If you take the top 4 teams we faced vs. the top 4 teams we faced when Lloyd went 7-5 in 2005, Lloyd scored like 15-20 more points total on them than RR did with this "great" offense.
It did help us win games this year, but only because our defense was beyond putrid. I'm still a believer that defense wins championships no matter your offense.
as Brian points out regularly when he was a kid scoring one TD was usually 1/3 of the way to winning a game...and we seem to have forgotten that lately because our defense has been so bad. You shouldn't have to score 50 points a game to win.
if scoring offense wasn't a really problematic measure of offensive strength.
generally that is true, which is why I narrowed it down to the top 4/5 teams we faced...I did the calculation last week so I can't really remember it super specifically. I mean truly looking at it we score what, 24? points on OSU in 3 years when they scored 100 on us? That to me is not a successful offense. If it doesn't work against the best team we play, it doesn't work.
Against the five best defensive teams we faced (OSU, Iowa, Miss St, MSU, Wisc), we scored an average of 18.8 points per game. That's not going to cut it.
And how many points per game did those defenses let up for the entire year? Since 3 out of those 5 had top 20 defenses in the nation, I would say 18.8 is above average. And why does no on include Illinois when looking at the top defenses we faced? They ended up, what, 5 spots behind MSU in defensive rankings? They were in the top third of all defenses. I guess that wouldn't fit with the "our offense played like crap against good defenses" meme though.
A crappy defense puts pressure your offense, this is way too simplistic to simply say we did not score enough. Face it we had a good offense that was almost fantastic. How many wide open drops or misses did we have. I've been watching since 1969 and i can never remember as many wide open runs or passes. if our defense did not blow so completely it would have even been better.