No. RR has already said it will be DG. Why, I don't know.
Jack Kennedy and the DG Redshirt
don't forget, in some sense RR is coaching for his job tomorrow. he doesn't know if he'll be the coach at Michigan next week which would lead me to believe he would play the guys that give him the best chance to win, regardless of a burned red shirt. that's what I'd do at least. if we lose tomorrow it's going to be very bad for his case to keep the HC job.
If DG's redshirt gets burned in a meaningless game where he only plays a couple play, then I will be completely swayed to the "OMG RR FIRE HHHIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIMMMMMMMMMMMMMM"
I don't understand this thinking. I want Michigan to win. I don't want to have Denard have to miss time and our team to put a 2008-esque quarterback on the field. That would make the game that much more unbearable.
I want RR not to give up, that will just lead the team to givng up. I want him to win. I want him to want to win. Putting his best players on the field is how you win. If Denard has to come out, you put your best players on the field. Even if it's only for a few plays, you have to use him.
Gardner has 3 more seasons to try and get another redshirt season. If Denard and Tate can cover all or most (although I would never hope for an injury) of next year, a red shirt is still possible.
If Denard gets seriously injured in the first half and we know he won't come back, go ahead and put DG in. If he just gets dinged up and should only be out for 2-3 plays, which is what usually happens, don't put DG in the game. Put Gallon or JK in there and just run it.
I was thinking the same exact thing. If its a major injury then do what you have to do, however if its something small and he will be in the next play I think that we can run some kind of wildcat type offense and be completely fine for a series. I do not want to risk a year of DG for one game. I honestly believe the DG will be the QB that leads us back to the promise land and we need him as long as possible.
But on the other hand, leaving aside the coaching situation, would you rather take a loss to Mississippi State in a meaningless game (and one you might lose even if you play Gardner) or would you rather burn Gardner's 2013 (if he were to go pro early) or 2014 season? For me, that's an easy call. I'd like a win tomorrow, but I'm not going to be crying on Monday if we lose.
You put in your best players to try and win the game. The team is bigger than one player. Who even knows if Tate will be back next year. Devin might be in store for more work over the next two years than we expected.
I'm guessing DG wouldn't be thrilled about the prospect of sitting out all of next year. I'm guessing he sees himself as Denard's number-two next season.
I'm talking more a couple plays. If DR gets hurt right before halftime of a competitive game and they decide during the break that he cannot come back, then so be it: bring in DG.
If it's for a play or two just because DR has to get his pads readjusted or whatever, then no. This game simply isn't worth it. You cannot look at this as a win at all costs game. Why should it be any different if we lose the game by 6 with Kennedy playing a few snaps as opposed to winning with DG playing a few snaps?
If there's any judgement of RR to come from this game it should be of the defense: we all know what RR's offense can do w/ Denard in there.
Plus, if you burn DG's RS you are looking at serious QB depth issues again and have to scramble to find a QB this recruiting year (considering Tate is on the fence).
And, from a fan perspective, since it is more likely that JH is already coming here, the last thing I want is DG's RS burned.
I wouldn't trade a couple snaps of Gardner or even an entire half of Gardner to win the gator bowl this year for 12 or 13 games in 4 years when the team could hopefully be primed for a run at the MNC assuming DG turns out to be the shit like he looks like he will be. Then again I'm not RR. I'm sure RR feels like he's coaching for his job tomorrow. If Michigan looks really good against MSU it's going to make firing him harder- it'll probly still happen- but in RR's mind he needs to coach the game of his life tomorrow to keep this job.
I don't know. I'm one to think you play to win now. One in the hand is worth two in the bush style. There's no guarantee that DG will be here in 3 years. He could bolt with a coaching change. He could get injured. Our team could really suck in 3-4 years.
No one wants to think about it like that, but you play with what you have, and you play to win. These kids, including DG, came to play. You let them play, even if it means just the few snaps. They are here to help the team win games. This is where they are needed. This is where they should play.
I understand the fan perspective of saving players to be used more efficiently, but putting in a walk-on who isn't particularly built for our offense, nor was heavily recruited, is the equivalent of quitting. Even if it's for one snap, it's quitting.
You're resigning that this game means nothing. You might as well not even watch it then. It apparently means nothing to you.
I don't work that way. I don't think most of the people here work that way. We want to see Michigan win. We want to see Michigan give everything they've got.
I can understand fans' patience and impatience with long term results, but the short term goal is always WIN. If you don't win now, that jeopardizes the long term goals, regardless of which coach is at the helm.
As far as depth, I'm not worried if DG stays through a coaching change. That's all rampant speculation. We don't know that Denard would leave. We don't know that the next head coach would call plays to his current players strong suits. There's so many "what-ifs" that I'm just not worried about it.
that if denard needs a breather we will see gallon running the read for a play or two.
Let's just hope for a healthy Denard, although there hasn't been a game that'll give us confidence in that...
RR has already said DG is the backup. Such a shame that Tate's indiscipline has led to this. (Let's also remember that DG would have never played earlier in the year if Tate hadn't had such a poor offseason.)
It's also a shame because Tate appeared to have turned a corner with the team.
MSU would defintely go after Denard if they knew Kennedy was going to be his backup. I actually wouldn't be surprised if it was just for a play or two if they put in Kennedy instead of Gardner. If it was something more serious they would have to burn the redshirt.
I feel like MSU was going to go after him no matter who the backup was because the backup would be a significant step down from Denard regardless of who it was. Basically, this is what all the teams we played this year did. Remember all the talk about Michigan State practicing twisting his ankles and what not...This whole Tate being an idiot thing will not change how much MSU wants to get Denard out of the game.
You're right, they're gonna be a nasty defense regardless. If someone wants a preview, take a look at the MSU defense cut ups against LSU. Denard, Devin, Jack, me, or you could be back there, and they would try and kill the QB regardless.
I'm not sure how much this actually "protects" Denard. If I'm a Miss State player, I'd drool at the thought of Michigan having to throw a true frosh with almost no game experience (Gardner) in there. Realistically, we'll be in trouble if Denard gets hurt, no matter who's in there.
not real action.......but if Denard gets the wind knocked out of him at the end of another long run, and stays down (briefly), he still needs to come out for the next play. If we are sure he is coming back, would RR still undo the whole medical redshirt thang, and cost DG a season, over a snap or two?
It still seems viable for Kennedy to be used instead of DG,if it is just a hiccup.
I wouldn't mind it. I much prefer having DG for the future. Perhaps we could also possibly see Gallon? Wasn't him that was being reported was taking snaps at QB (which he played in high school)? I thought he was simulating Relf, but perhaps there was another reason too? I assume he ca do the QB lead iso well enough for a few plays.
Chengelis mentioned it in her article this morning...A good idea, I think...he's an unknown quantity, bring him in to run QB draw, then hand off, bring Denard back in. If Denard gets knocked out for a significant time, however, RR may have to put in DG, he is the back-up now.
what your team can do for you, but what you can do for your team.
Vote Kennedy. He's the best choice for a better tomorrow.
Ahhh that is my jam
I could see gallon if they expect denard to be out for 1 play.
Cell phone fail.
It's gonna depend on the situation. Mark Snyder seems to think Gallon was running plays in the offense because RR saw this happening.
Wouldn't be surprised at the Freep speculation, however..
I read the article again. It does look a lot like speculation. No concrete facts, just a couple of quotes, a bunch of non-commital verbs (may be, could, etc.)...
I'll be honest with you, I kind of hope they're right.
I'm pretty sure Marilyn was the "hot option."
counts towards burning a redshirt? If so, why weren't the OSU players suspended for the bowl plus 3 games next year?
Because the NCAA is hypocritical, and doesn't want to reduce the value of the bowl game by taking out OSU's star players. Isn't interested that this investigation and announcement took so long? Think they knew what they were going to do before the Michigan game?
I don't really know what the answer is, but going forward, we've got to stop getting Denard killed. No matter whom the coach is next season, his carries have to go down significantly. A lot of people say we should emulate Oregon. Well, their QB (Darron Thomas) carried the ball 86 times in 12 games, sacks included. I don't think you can realistically expect a QB Denard's size to survive 20+ carries a game, and I'm getting tired of always having an injured QB when we play OSU.
Jack Kennedy would probably have to get a number change right? Can we have 2 #20s in the backfield?
No. The special teams earlier in the year had that exact penalty for having two players on the field with the same number.
I hear that's available
Running Denard like that is what makes the offense work.
It is an inescapable downside to running a run-first, read-option with a smallish QB with great running skills.
Edit: This was meant as a reply to jmblue. Sorry.
Then the offense needs to be tweaked. Hey, everyone says that Oregon is what we're supposed to look like next year. Darron Thomas rushed for 40 yards per game. It didn't slow them down any.
Chad Henne never had any injury problems standing back there in the pocket. Having the best RB in the nation probably has nothing to do with Thomas' lack of carries, either.
Chad Henne was a four-year starter. Only in one of those four years did he have injury issues. His predecessor (Navarre) was a three-year starter and never missed time due to injury. To compare that to what we're seeing now is ridiculous.
And the difference between Oregon and us has more to do with philosophy than personnel. Even when RR had TWO of the nation's top runners in Slaton and Devine in 2007, he still had Pat White carry the ball 197 times. RR has always preferred his QB to be a primary running threat. He may want to rethink that. Unless you're a 250-pound beast like Cam Newton, you probably can't survive a season carrying the ball that much.
This is Denard's skill set and why Denard is the starter. Denard has improved as a passer, but it is that breakaway speed that makes Denard, well, Denard.
To make Denard a throwing QB who runs just enough to keep the defense honest isn't RR's offense. What you are seeing is RR's offense.
as soon as we have our version of Lamichael James, I think this will be the case.
Hint: I'm lookin' at you Dee
I'm on the Gallon-for-back up bandwagon. Assuming it's just for a few plays, Gallon was a QB in HS and his team ran a similar offense to what we do. If we put him in for spot duty, that would save DG's Red-shirt. IMO
If I was David Brandon I would give RR strict instructions not to burn DG's possible medical redshirt. Anyone out there who still believes RR's fate rests with the results of this game is kidding themselves. RR has made very difficult decisions regarding players' health even when it would have improved the odds of winning a game. The health of the player always came first. I would hate to see that change. If RR is to go, I would like people to remember that he always put the player first. If DRob is really 100% we shouldn't need him, but in a pinch, I would play Kennedy.
Hoping this is more smokescreen than anything. If DG comes in for a few plays and burns that redshirt things are going to get pretty ugly around here. I'm guessing he does not see the field but who knows.
There are not enough expletives for me to say to you right now.
You seem to know a lot about being a douche.
Feel free to say why playing Devin would be best for the team.
Answer: he plays and we win the game.
another coaching change, especially for a coach who hasn't really proven anything except that he can find success with upper classmen leadership in a relatively weak conference, than we should all be worrying about the short run, the medium run, and the long run........
DG was QB2 to start the season. He is not going to be moved behind a walk on who hasn't seen the field, no matter what the arm chair coaches think is the right move.
The bowl game is why the team plays the season. I am embarassed for you that you refer to it as an exhibition.
You play the players that give you the best chance at winning in every game. Suggesting otherwise is absurd.
The bowl game is why the team plays the season. I am embarassed for you that you refer to it as an exhibition.
This. Yes. Very much.
There is no "personal" anything here. This is a team sport, you play to win. The bowl is the culmination of the entire season. You continually show your stupidity and blind bias that you accuse many others of.
Have a great new year, asshole.
Dahblue, you are an ignorant jackass.
concerning not playing Devin Gardner (to preserve his red shirt), but decided to wait until after the season and do a full review.
it makes me.....sad :(
Whether you're with FA (a very thoughtful point, FA, but I disagree. I will be upset if DG loses his med RS tomorrow) or not (and FYI, I'm with FA on this point - that's a load of crap, that RichRod is trying to screw the team by... um... playing his backup QB potentially?), it's a bummer of a situation.
No matter how you slice it, "Tate ineligible, DG potentially burning RS" is not how I want to end the season.
Let's make this all moot, Shoelace!
But Gallon has been practicing some as a QB, no? That's been pretty well documented. So, unless he's always done so, it stands to reason that RR did see this situation coming.
JK's rap career?
Is he eligible?
If he played in this game, thereby nixing his chances at a redshirt this year, if if didn't play next year would be still be able to get a redshirt?