Iowa Musings (mostly positive, not rants)
So, just finished the game (I watch on DVR delay because of young kids). My thoughts on what this game showed:
1. Blake Countess is for real. Sure, he got beaten a few times, but he reminds me so much of Donovan Warren. Physical, great instincts. This kid is going to be a lock-down stud CB in a year or two.
2. The "shoud we start DEvin, and not Denard" should be be put to rest (ok, it never should have started). DEnard missed a few passes. He still overthrows some and has a few batted down. On the last drive, however, he looked like a legit QB. He marched us down the field with his arm, making smart solid throws. Even his misses were in places where the CB couldn't have a shot to intercept. I know, his stats suck compared to last year, but he is really starting to look like a pro style QB. Give him another offseason, and I think he is going to be awesome next year. Devin, while talented, is not even close. When he came in, our offense looked terrible. Not a criticism - he has little experience running the offense- but as of now (and likely next year), Denard is miles ahead.
3. Fitz - he really is good. V. Smith is a lovable little guy, but should be used primarily as the 3rd down back. He was stopped on first or second down for little or no gain too many times in the first half.
4. Denard, why you no run? There were several plays where DEnard had tunning lanes, and just hung in the pocket. Now, his pocket presence and overall throwing was great today, in my opinion, but still, when you are the fastest player in cfb and there is nobody for 6-7 yards, tuck and run.
5. The receivers really didnt help Denard out today. WAy too many drops. Sure, some may have not been on perfct throws, but my rule of thumb is that if the ball hits your hands, you should pull it in. Hemmingway, Roundtree and Dilio all dropped passes.
6. The refs - I don';t want to get hung up on this, but this game was terribly called there were at least 2 missed pass interference calls on the last drive, most critically on the last play. Also, sorry, Hemmingway's knee came down in bounds, and we should have had that TD. Whatever, it happens and it sucks, but it still pisses me off. Hoke should have challenged that last play.
7. the Fritz package. I know that many are down on it, but I do think that Hoke Borges and Co. are working on it to break out new stuff against OSU. IF so, I am ok with it. Otherwise, I don't love it. Just not getting much out of it.
OVerall, I like where we are heading. WE lost a close game to a solid team. We will get at least 1 more win, and maybe 2. Good season, with solid improvement, given the cc, new system, etc.
November 5th, 2011 at 11:44 PM ^
Either... Run when nobody is around you in the pocket. He could have had 50 plus yards if he takes off. I wish the fucker would just tuck and run more
November 5th, 2011 at 11:46 PM ^
He always seems just 2 step away from "getting it" and making the next step. TOday, great passing, shitty reads of open run lanes.
November 6th, 2011 at 12:09 AM ^
17/39 and completely overthrowing wide open receivers in the clutch? Continually not hitting BASIC routes? Multiple batted down passes? He can't even use his best talent because he can't figure out when to scramble. He still doesn't get it and most likely never will. He can't process it all. He is basically Forrest Gump when it comes to pocket awareness and elicits frustration not seen since John Navarre, except denard is a worse passer. And I'm extra harsh because so many ppl on the blog are delusional and defend him and say well look at ND.
November 6th, 2011 at 12:56 AM ^
okay....so the only difference between Denard and Navarre is that Denard is a worse passer...great input, thanks
November 6th, 2011 at 7:37 AM ^
I was referring to the amount of frustration experienced by watching him play with the Navarre comparison. How is the first comment trolling? Maybe the Gump comment was a little extreme. But the coaches obv told him to run out of bounds to avoid injury. On that long run he could have gotten 10 more yards but it seems he takes instruction as black or white with no situational thought. This might explain his maddening inability to scramble. I like denard based upon what I've seen of him off the field, but quit looking at him with Rose colored glasses as a competent QB. His inability to throw basic passes puts us in situations like MSU and Iowa and ND: All games that were close but where we best ourselves or Borges vertical bombing got lucky.
<br>
<br>His awards last year were based off hype and inflated stats against weak competition. When we played physical big ten opposition Denard looked just like he did against Iowa, MSU, and Ohio state. Yes Borges Isnt helping but it's more on Denards passing.
November 6th, 2011 at 6:22 AM ^
November 6th, 2011 at 8:19 AM ^
Amutnal... I wish I knew you but I dont so ill tell you now: SHUT THE FUCK UP
November 6th, 2011 at 8:57 AM ^
Great retort. This is a blog. There are numerous threads with ppl venting but also trying to paint a picture of the horrible offensive situation we have. I'm glad I don't know you and instead of trying to be a bad ass why don't you put forth cogent arguments as to why I'm wrong?
November 6th, 2011 at 10:24 AM ^
Because if you knew anything about the difference's between borges and RR's offense you would know that what denard does on every play is 150% different. You know that whole thing when the O would line up last year and then all look at the coach's who would change the play? Thats the coaching staff looking at the coverage for him, then audibling to a play such as Roundtree post where they know they'd beat the coverage. Denard has no experience looking at 2 high safeties thinking cover 2 then right before the snap one walks down over the slot and immediately it changes to man Cover 1. It happens fast and it happens from defense's who are great at disguising coverages. He's shown time and again that hes our starting quarterback and drove us down the field making great throws when it mattered. I think 16 is far and away the best player on our team and we should all give the kid a break in his first season in a new role and showing considerable progress going through his progressions. And insulting Denards intelligence by calling him forrest gump is so unbelievably inappropriate and uncalled for.
November 6th, 2011 at 11:43 AM ^
I understand there are differences in offensive philosophy, apparently not as well as you do. But I didn't insult his overall intelligence. I specifically referred to his inability to determine when to scramble. And we are arguing different points, although your comments were insightful. I said nothing about his ability to read coverages. However, I thought he made the correct read most of the time, but badly missed most of the time (there were drops... I know). My main critique was his inherent inability to make routine passes. How does Borges game plan when he cant count on Denard making the simplest of throws?! I'd argue that for this game many ppl would have traded Denard for the opposing QB, which if I'm correct, is a better gauge of his competence. I agree he is our best chance right now but will not suffice in the long run. We will get crushed by Bama unless something drastically changes.
November 5th, 2011 at 11:51 PM ^
I really hope you are not a real Michigan fan. You better get banned for calling Denard that...
November 5th, 2011 at 11:56 PM ^
My god, that is frustrating. Almost every bad play he makes, there is at least enough room for him to pick up 5 yards or maybe the first down. I guess just too much for him to think about at once.
November 5th, 2011 at 11:46 PM ^
November 5th, 2011 at 11:53 PM ^
Why the hell did I write stonum? fixed it - nice catch.
November 5th, 2011 at 11:46 PM ^
Except Stonum isn't playing thus year, you meant Roundtree and Hoke cannot challenge a non-call. The pick at the end of the first killed us. D was amazing in 3 and 4th and 1. But Robinson could have broken this game open in the 3 rd quarter he would have scrambled... Ugh
November 6th, 2011 at 12:13 AM ^
Man we need Stonum big time. Next year, I guess.
November 6th, 2011 at 1:12 AM ^
Can you imagine if we picked up Diggs and Payton, with Stonum coming back, and Roundtree and Gallon masters of armpunt catches, with Denard getting another year in the system and a full winter throwing passes all day every day... I'm gonna sleep well tonight on that dream. Forgot all about Iowa.
November 5th, 2011 at 11:47 PM ^
the sad truth is we simply aren't that good. the defensive coaches have made great strides but there remains a talent deficiency on both sides of the ball as well as on special teams. i just watched lsu-bama and was amazed by the quality of the athletes. their speed, reaction time, and tackling is far superior to what we show.
no one should be surprised by this-we're very young and have very little depth. these problems can only be solved by recruiting. our defense may well take a step back next year with the loss of martin and van bergen (woolfolk can be replaced). i can hope the offense will make progress but that is not a certainty.
2013 and 2014 will be proof of whether this regime has what it it takes to be successful. in the meantime, most games will be struggles. todays' negativity will die down if we beat illinois which makes next weeks' game perhaps the most important of the season.
November 6th, 2011 at 12:08 AM ^
Plus on offense we don't have elite talent or even border-line elite talent at key positions. Denard is great, but name me one program that we consider to be big time that recruited him as a quarterback. We're getting the best these guys have and they keep improving. Can't ask for more than that. Still when we run into a team with equal or better talent like today, we'll need to play 4 good quarters to win.
Thanks for bringing up talent. The talent relative to our opponents is a big factor in these games. The two teams Michigan lost too had better talent roster-wide.
November 6th, 2011 at 12:16 AM ^
Florida?
November 6th, 2011 at 12:58 AM ^
yup...that's one...ask our buddie Urban
November 6th, 2011 at 12:26 AM ^
Big Ten player of the year and something like 6th in the Heisman voting. If we're talking about the talent deficiency today, I hope you mean our OC (who went from Auburn to a MWC school), and our approximately .500 lifetime coach (who even put on a headset at the end!). Hoke's a nice guy and I'll root for him, and our environment is so toxic that we need him to succeed (we'll never accept an outsider, and who is left of the Carr tree -- Ron English?!), but it sure would be nice for us to open up the checkbook to hire some assistants to add to Mattison.
November 6th, 2011 at 12:42 AM ^
Maybe this could fly against OSU, but this is no excuse against Iowa.
November 6th, 2011 at 12:36 AM ^
November 5th, 2011 at 11:50 PM ^
Stonum dropped passes?
Outside of that, I agree with most of the stuff you said!
November 6th, 2011 at 1:26 AM ^
He dropped the figurative ball on the season, I guess.
November 5th, 2011 at 11:52 PM ^
I like having the diamond formation much better than the Denard jet play. It didn't look like Denard was doing a good job selling it today. Don't know if it was a timing thing, but it looked a couple times like he was running half speed to the hand-off fake. I dunno, I'm kinda with you, the Denard jet is so one dimensional it's not really worth breaking the rhythm of a drive to pull out, but I have a feeling there will be a couple wrinkles that come out of it later.
November 5th, 2011 at 11:53 PM ^
good post...nice to hear something rational that isn't just a bunch of whining. I agree with these points for the most part.
Also, I'm already tired of people bitching about Borges. It's not his fault we lost. Yeah, some play calls were suspect, but you can't call the perfect play everytime. Overall, I think he put us in a position to win the game, but mistakes (the red zone int) and the players not executing is what killed us. Not the play calling. He's not a spred guru, so the offense isn't going to look like last years, but I think he has put us in the position to win every game we have played so far and that's all you can ask of him.
November 6th, 2011 at 12:32 AM ^
That borges put us in positions to win when we lost? I like Borges too but I think he's being awfully stubborn having Denard throw three deep balls in a row to tacopants. You have to understand your talent, and I think Borges is missing something right now
November 6th, 2011 at 8:34 AM ^
He isn't MAKING Denard throw 3 deep balls in a row. He is calling plays where there is a deep option and Denard is overthrowing the receiver b/c he isn't THAT good of a QB. How do people not get this?
If Denard could hit a wide open receiver (Roundtree) more than 20 yrds down the field, we wouldn't be having this conversation. Knowing that he can't, I put it on Denard to not make that throw and find a check down instead.
November 6th, 2011 at 8:34 AM ^
I'm not sure throwing those deep balls are all on Borges. I bet there are intermediate and short routes that denard could go to, but he locks onto the receiver and tries to make big plays for our team when they aren't there
November 6th, 2011 at 10:43 AM ^
You've gotta learn somehow, I guess.
November 5th, 2011 at 11:53 PM ^
Speaking of our premiere back, any word on how serious the injury is?
November 6th, 2011 at 12:00 AM ^
Reasonable and well thought out. Yeah the team lost but there is still a lot of football left to be played. Of course some teams will have to lose to help and M will have to win out. The future still looks bright for M.
November 6th, 2011 at 12:01 AM ^
a solid team is probably a stretch. They are a team that was staring down going 6-6 without a win today.
November 6th, 2011 at 12:02 AM ^
This team is right where I thought they would be, maybe a game better. Look, they have lost 2 hard fought games and had chances to win them both. I hate to say it but msu is a good team and very tough to beat at home. The same thing can be said about Iowa. I think Iowa losing to Minnesota really helped Iowa refocus and get ready for Michigan.
The season is not lost. A bounce back win next week and then at least a split over the last two games at home and they finish 9-3. If you told me in August that this team would finish 9-3, I would have taken it all day.
November 6th, 2011 at 12:05 AM ^
why no Oregon vs Washington on TV?
November 6th, 2011 at 12:17 AM ^
It's on my TV, course I'm in Portland
November 6th, 2011 at 12:06 AM ^
I'm all for the Denard-is-solely-a-QB argument, but the more and more he struggles to throw a catchable ball, the less and less I'm willing to buy the argument he's the sole option under center. Because really, let's be honest, it's becoming more and more of an issue, and the fact that we can't rely on our quarterback to connect on a deep route is a pretty serious detriment to what this offense can do. It's either an arm punt or complete to Tacopants.
November 6th, 2011 at 12:08 AM ^
Denard is Michigan's best option at qb to win games the season period.
November 6th, 2011 at 12:15 AM ^
That's becoming more and more of a questionable statement as the season unfolds.
November 6th, 2011 at 12:18 AM ^
Devin's not ready he proved that when he came in when Denard was hurt.
November 6th, 2011 at 1:46 AM ^
But at what point do we put him in to become ready? I wonder if they are putting him in to transition to a larger role next year. He definitely has a better arm than Denard, just very green still.
November 6th, 2011 at 6:53 AM ^
Devin will play when Denard graduates or gets injured. Until then the evidence suggests that Denard gives Michigan the best chance to. win games.
November 6th, 2011 at 9:29 AM ^
This is the worst logic ever. I can't believe it is picking up legs on this site. Devin came in for 1 series mid-game, and went 3 and out so he is not ready?
By that logic Denard isn't ready b/c he went 3 and out the first series of the game. I'm not saying Devin should be the guy right now, but until he gets multiple consecutive series in a game and fails, I'm not ready to rule him out. It is completely unfair to make the sweeping statement you make based on coming off the bench for 3 plays in the middle of a game.
November 6th, 2011 at 12:24 AM ^
Devin did a nice job demonstrating this to us.
November 6th, 2011 at 12:12 AM ^
(other than losing of course), is that the final play should have been a run. There's no time for another play, and Iowa is in lock down on the pass. Put Hopkins in to make a hole and run Denard at it. He fakes one pass and takes off. He will get those three yards.
Still, reciever should have caught it and two is by no means certain.
I want to watch the replays, but I'm proud of the boys. We weren't winning an NC this year (or even making the Rose Bowl), so a couple of loses while we learn good lessons are important.
November 6th, 2011 at 1:53 AM ^
I would have liked to see a run there too, but its hard to second guess when the play should have resulted in a PI call (not to mention it should have been unnecessary after the Hemingway TD that wasnt)
November 6th, 2011 at 5:51 AM ^
We had 1st and Goal, and I was really wanting to slam it in rather than choose that moment to work on short passes. We probably had a better shot on the ground. These are teachable moments, no?
November 6th, 2011 at 2:13 PM ^
You forgot about time. 4th down was the only viable option unless you wanted to go all in on one run play. Otherwise, time would have expired