No More QBs Please
With regard to Paulus, Jason Forcier, etc. I keep hearing that there is no downside; best case they play, worst case they add depth.
I disagree. I think either could be an unwelcome distraction, rattle the freshmen's confidence, and take away from valuable practice reps. I am more positive on the idea of Jason Forcier as coach. I don't love him playing.
Frankly, I don't want Denard watching Tate from the sideline in a Forcier brother sandwich between Chris and Jason. I don't want him running off the field to greet the whole family on the sideline--imagine that level of pressure and weirdness as a 19 year-old. I don't want him, or Tate, losing practice reps while we try to get a wild card one year guy up to speed.
The way I see it any QB that starts in 2009 (Sheridan excluded) is equally "new" in the sense that they are fairly unfamiliar with our offense, have little to no game experience, etc. I appreciate what can be gained with 3-4 years of life, but they are all UM QB infants this fall. It is no step forward in that regard. And unless you feel we are markedly better in 2009 with one of the new post-grads, why slow the development of Tate or Denard?
As a disclaimer, I do trust what I have heard with respect to the Forciers being great guys, positive, team-oriented. I don't doubt that and I am also receptive to the argument that they may raise the comfort level and confidence of Tate. But I am concerned about the locker room dynamic of having all of them together. Perhaps I am being overly sensitive here but I would prefer to give Tate and Denard a fairly even balance of power within the team space. I just don't see how that can happen if the whole family is here; no matter how wonderful they are.
And Paulus. I mean, did anyone not hate him at Duke? Sorry to be childish about it, but I think Brian's editorial decision to include that video is fitting for anyone that watched him play. I wish him well (somewhere else).
"I don't want him running off the field to greet the whole family on the sideline--imagine that level of pressure and weirdness as a 19 year-old."
Well, we've already established the Forciers are kind of a weird family to begin with...
So what happens if Tate or Denard or both get injured?
Forcier I invite -- he would be joining his brother, his career is essentially over either way, and he would be more of a player-coach 3rd string guy for one year.
Paulus would worry me. With his basketball career over, he'd be coming in for a 1-and-done with hopes of starting for a year to "begin" his football career. I'd much rather have a true freshman get the practice reps and a chance to start rather than risk a 1 year experiment.
But I'm stunned to read a post from any Michigan fan that endured 2008 titled "No more QBs please." Amazing. I'm sure no coach of the spread read would ever feel that way. Again, I hear your points - I don't want any of our frosh getting annoyed... but coaches don't and shouldn't worry about 18 year sensibilities... they have to trust that these kids mean it when they say they want to compete, day in and day out, and they have to work on improving the team's depth.
the assumption seems to be that Paulus would only come here to start. I don't think that's accurate.
Hear me out. I realize it seems weird for him to spend a year playing backup QB, but (1) clearly the GB Packers think he MAY have some NFL talent, (2) it's quite possible they communicated that to him, but with the caveat "you really need to be coached a bit before we take a flier on you", and (3) isn't practicing with U of M (with the chance of playing) better than nothing?
I guess my point is this - I understand some not wanting Paulus to come in and start. But I doubt that happens. And to those that say, "well, then it's moot, because he'd only come here to start" I'd say, "not necessarily." One year prepping with a major college program has got to be considered better than (1) entering the NFL draft right now, with nothing to speak of other than HS tapes, or (2) entering the NFL draft next year after working out on your own all year. Maybe UM's system isn't ideal for him, but dude's still going to be in CFB weight training, CFB practices making reads/throws, etc., and frankly, he does have a legit chance to play based on depth issues.
I fully agree with what you say about Paulus' intentions to get some work in at an elite college progrm. And if all else fails, Paulus gets a great graduate education from a great school.
We cannot afford to turn our nose up at QB's b/c of serious depth issues and overall inexperience. Our Frosh need to compete and should want to compete to make themselves better. I would be a bit disappointed if Paulus beats our Forcier but I highly doubt that would happen and he offers the previously stated positives.
Was never a huge Paulus fan at Duke but I had no reason. Seemed like he was hoping to be the next JJ Reddick but I have nothing to base my general dislike for him. Seemed like a good enough guy to play for Coach K and fall into a reduced role as a senior to benefit the team.
Well said (both posts).
i disagree. i dont think he comes to be a backup. you have to ask yourself, whats the difference between working out yourself or working out with a team but never seeing the field. i dont think the one year experience with coach rod and his staff (who, lets be honest, does not have the best track record with putting out pro qbs) will be THAT much of a benefit o him, especially assuming that there are other teams he could start for.
just ask that? there's quite a difference between doing drills for a year and working out with actual, real live college players for a season. big difference.
I don't know man. When I was training to be a college QB I would work out my arm by throwing the ball as far as I could then work on my speed by running to go get it. You don't need a team or coaches for that.
You live in LA because you're in the entertainment business.
And your screen name is Bugs Bunny.
Bingo.
There's a huge difference.
I work out a lot.
However, if I worked out with the Michigan Wolverines, it would be a MUCH DIFFERENT workout.
For example, I'd probably be re-learning how to feed myself or how to walk.
(Those guys would kick my ass. I'm an old man.)
sorry i should have been more clear.
i meant, what kind of difference is it going to mean for his draft. because he attended michigan football and rode the bench he wont see his draft stock go significantly higher, if thats what hes worried about. if he wants to goto the pros, chances are hes going in as an undrafted free agent, and that wont change if he comes in now or spends a year as a backup.
yes. doing drills with a team is different than doing them by yourself. thanks for the overall asshole responses though.
...Matt Cassel.
Playing a year of college football - even if it's only during practice - would be much better preparation than doing drills. If he entered the draft now, he wouldn't have played football in four years. He'd be way behind in his development. With a year of practice time, he'd at least get used to doing footwork drills and football workouts and reading defenses and watching film and re-learning the timing of football, etc.
Also, this is a special case, but I'm guessing it's too late for him to enter the NFL draft this year, since it's a week and a half away.
So he can either try to latch on in the NFL and probably get cut...
...OR...
...he can play a year of college football, try out for a team next year, and have a slightly better chance of sticking.
matt cassel was a four year backup, not one. and that is a rare exception.
and i agree with you about him wanting a year of prep. but the original poster said he would still come to michigan even if he was a backup. THAT was what i was disagreeing about, for the sole reason that playing the backup role for one season wont do much for any potential future career in the nfl.
so let me clarify. i would be ambivalent if he came, sure he would be good for depth. but i dont think hes going anywhere unless he knows for sure he can start. and therefore, i dont think he comes here if he thinks hes just going to ride the bench.
Okay.
Whoa
I really don't understand how the Forcier kids could be a distraction. For one, they could be a sounding board for Tate and they also could bestow that thing called real time knowledge about there younger brother. Now, I can somewhat see the Paulus guy being a distraction because he hasn't been playing organized football after four years. Think of the adjusting he would have to undertake...However, Weinke did it...But I digress. I am for the brothers, one or both, not for the bluedevil. *looks around room to see where do I put my ballot*
If Forcier's confidence can really be rattled by bringing in a QB that has little chance of starting, he has no business competing for the spot. And I don't see how having another QB on the team is a distraction.
The "valuable reps" thing is driving me crazy; First with Sheridan's injury and now this, it boggles my mind how people are so willing to sacrifice depth for a little more practice time.
Thank you for posting exactly what I think.
I don't hate Greg Paulus.
If Greg Paulus's presence for one year rattles the confidence or Forcier or Robinson, then they will surely be rattled by 110,000 screaming fans or the crowd at the Horseshoe or a white-out at PSU. I think that reasoning is kind of silly.
I haven't been keeping track, but I have to imagine this is like the 100th thread where I've had the same opinion as you.
want 2 be e-friends?
I have too many e-friends as it is.
Thanks, match.com!
Lists Magnus as my friend without asking...cause dat is how I roll. oO(wonders what's his twitter name)
and the Michigan QB situation, you're post is incorrect. We have a crying need for experience, depth, and skill at QB. I don't think a rational person can look at our situation as it exists today (2 freshman who haven't played, and a sophomore who has and stunk) and believe we are ok at QB. Next year we may be (after one or both Frosh have played and hopefully shown much promise). This year we are not. Your argument boils down to either 1- the presence of another QB might cause Tate/Denard, to lose confidence, 2- He might steal valuable reps, and 3- somehow the presence of Tate's brother would add "weirdness" and pressure. Even if any of these were true, which is highly debatable if not flatly wrong (you do know that Tate committed knowing Threet was likely going to "take practice reps" from him right?) each one would be outweighed by the need to add skill, experience and depth at QB.
Blah blah blah e-pinion about qb's
YES, I hate Greg Paulus. I hate his guts and if he became a member of the Michigan football team I would vomit blood.
Yeah, who cares what's best for the football team. Let's only give offers to players that you like, Boutros. I'd hate for you to suffer through a season of high talent players that you dislike.
sounds like a plan
Also - no more DB's. I don't want guys like Vlad and JT getting distracted by us recruiting guys like MRob and the like. We should stop recruiting DB's until those guys graduate. I want them to get all the reps.
Don't be ridiculous. We recruited Emilien and Brandon Smith when Steve Brown was still around, and he's still good...wait a minute...
If nothing else, Paulus could potentially provide a solid scout QB when Michigan prepares for a team with a running quarterback. No offense to the Coner or his newly found mad running skills, but a good scout team quarterback can be extremely valuable in preparing for upcoming games.
Having Paulus on the team would allow Feagin to focus on his natural position, slot receiver, rather than force him to run other teams' offenses when Michigan faces an mobile QB.
Bad Post..
It seems like I did a bad job getting my argument accross. To clarify:
1. I am not "satisfied" with our QB situation/depth.
It is not that I think Tate and Denard are all we will ever need, or that "believe we are ok at QB." I think our lack of experienced QBs this year is a big minus, and I want us to aggressively recruit the position. What I fail to see is how stashing away one-year players helps much in building team depth. I will reassert my argument that Jason Forcier and Paulus are the equals, in terms of UM experience, of Tate and Denard this year. They do not improve our experience, they duplicate it. I would like to see 2-3 QB recruits this next year, but it is time to start building depth that is lasting.
2. I agree "practice reps" are to some extent overrated.
Nevertheless, we should all agree that developing 2-3 quarterbacks is easier than 4-6, if only from a teacher-student ratio. Right now Rod Smith is flying down to talk face-to-face with Denard and teach him the offense. They clearly think that kind of attention is important. Completely aside from the number of snaps in practice, there is the teaching component. E.g. one-on-one time breaking down film of your throwing mechanics. But I do agree this is a minor concern.
3. I need to clarify the statement about confidence being rattled.
What I am more concerned with is "confidence" in the coach's loyalty -- i.e. trust. Confidence that your coaches believe in you. And the confidence that feeds off of internal expectations.
I somewhat agree with those who will ridicule these sentiments and say that if you're worried about your coach's love you'll never perform on a big stage, be a success, etc. I get that. But confidence does have to be nurtured at times. Some of the best team-sport athletes in the world perform better depending on whether they "start" a game, or where they hit in a batting order. Some of the best hitters in major league baseball are given a game off against outstanding pitchers to preserve their confidence. If coaches more accomplished than any of us sometimes see the merit in starting or resting a professional 33 year-old for these reasons I don't think it is absurd to suggest cultivating the confidence of teenage D-I quarterbacks. Player confidence is a standard concern for coaches. Fans routinely buy into the group-think that constantly rotating QBs makes everyone perform worse because they're worried about making one mistake. "You have to pick one guy and get behind him!" everyone used to scream at Spurrier.
I am not saying these are fragile kids who may shrivel up and disappear if the path to the starting lineup is not covered in rose petals for them. But the perception that we are desperate for 2009 QB help does not project confidence in the team already practicing together. I think confidence is paramount with this team. Back when we were supposed to beat Utah we almost did. After Notre Dame and Toledo we got a second-half lead almost every game and held onto it like were just curious to see how long it could last.
Brevity is a friend of the blogs.
I think you are looking at these guys as more than what they would be, which is in-case-of-emergency short-term fixes. There are a few leftover scholarships, and currently the depth chart behind Tate lists true freshman most other teams wanted as a cornerback and a walk-on. If he gets hurt, the prospects of decent quarterbacking this season pretty much go down the tubes. All this would do is increase the likelihood of having a serviceable replacement. RichRod is going to have 4-6 quarterbacks in the future, I'm pretty sure he'll be able to handle it this season and still develop Tate and D-Rob.
I think you make good points. I may agree. I have also been operating under the assumption that Forcier/Paulus would not be a better back-up option than Sheridan. If either has the ability to run the offense better than Sheridan in 2009, I completely agree. Upgrade the reinforcements.
What I fail to see is how stashing away one-year players helps much in building team depth
Per Brian: "Since he's got only one year left Michigan could put him on the team without adversely affecting next year's recruiting class. It's basically a free quarterback."
Why would anyone not take anything for free? Paulus joining up with Michigan has no long term effects and costs no scholarships after the year is done. Why not take Paulus?
I think we are not necessarily desperate for QB help. We are desperate for experience and depth. The problem is we have solid young prospects that have little to compete with/back them up. We should have experience at QB to allow the freshman QB's to properly develop and learn from experience leaders. Paulus would add depth, as would J. Forcier. Their age may add a leadership quality that hasn't been mentioned. I do not think it hurts the team or the program going forward.
If Ty Lawson was a 4 star QB coming out of high school and was looking into coming to Michigan following his UNC bball career I guarantee we would be very excited. We need to start this discussion by putting aside whatever hate we have for Duke or Paulus in particular.
I'm all for depth, but depth for depth's sake is silly. Why don't I just take my 5-7 self (that's height AND 40 time all rolled into one neat package) down to RR and sign up for quarterback to provide depth? We'll have Tate, Denard, Sheridan, and Coner for QB depth, as well as Feagin and Brown in emergencies, and yes I realize Feagin is ticketed elsewhere and Cone is Cone. But if we're ever in a situation where Paulus would be needed for a game, aren't we basically screwed anyway? Wouldn't someone who's been around the game of football the last four years and is used to the knocks and has a vague familiarity with the offense just by osmosis be a better option than a guy who's been playing basketball? I don't see us getting a whole lot of benefit from this.
Besides adding "depth for depth's sake," what is the downside?
None. But what is the upside? What does Paulus bring us that we're not going to get from this Kennedy kid or Nader Furrha? Nothing is the answer. Jason Forcier is different - there's clearly some tangible benefits to having him around to help out his brother. But, if there were twenty players, all in Paulus's situation and all wanting to come to Michigan, why not add them all for a year? Free depth, yay! But that's silly, you say. We're not talking about adding twenty, we're talking about adding one. (I don't see the elder Forcier as a legit possibility given the NCAA hoops involved.) You might say twenty is silly, I say one is silly, it's just a matter of numbers. It's not like I'm gonna get all worked up and pissy if Paulus walks on, but the positive effect of having him on the team is basically zero. I don't even view it as depth because of the freakishly awful set of circumstances that would have to happen for him to have any effect whatsoever on our season. We'd see about as much benefit to the team as a particularly efficient and well-liked headphone cord carrier.
The thing that Paulus brings that we're not going to get from Kennedy or Furrha is legitimate D-I quarterback potential. That's something Sheridan doesn't even bring to the table. And he has just as much college football experience as Denard. So I think there is a decent chance that he could become a more serviceable backup QB than anyone else who will be on the team this fall. I still really don't want to see a backup QB on the field this fall, but I don't see why anyone would be against having more D-I caliber options if Tate is injured. It's not like the options are going to get better if he doesn't join the team.
Sorry, but the idea that Paulus has "legitimate D-I quarterback potential" is so far out from left field it's not even worth entertaining. If he had his full four years of eligibility left? Sure, maybe - he could redshirt, take his time, yadda yadda. He hasn't played football for four years. He's not in football shape. Whatever arm strength and quarterbacking skills he had that caused him to be recruited four years ago have atrophied. He absolutely would not be a "D-I caliber option." He'd be a scout-teamer while he bulked up in preparation for a tryout with the NFL and re-learned his quarterbacking. That's it.
He has been playing a Division I sport. I doubt many of his muscles have atrophied. If he put in a couple months of work, I really have no doubt that his arm strength would be just fine.
He might not be a quality QB, but it won't have anything to do with his strength/conditioning/musculature.
I'm not the only one questioning the arm strength.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=4070344
You don't stop throwing for four years and go into the weight room for a couple months and be just as good as you were four years ago.
@heisman2 and wile: if Paulus is clearly that much better than the scout-team types we have as depth right now and has all the talent and potential of his four-star days as a high schooler, why didn't RR offer right then and there when Paulus was watching practice? Wouldn't that be a no-brainer?
How do you know that he's stopped throwing? Maybe he throws passes to his friends on the weekends or in the offseason. Maybe his strength and conditioning coaches happen to work the appropriate muscle groups.
Besides that, arm strength is MUCH MORE about technique than pure strength. There's an example right in front of us: Tate Forcier is (according to eyewitness accounts) probably 5'10" and 180 lbs. or so, and he's never lifted weights before. Yet he has a rocket for an arm. Is that because he has super large arm muscles?
I'm not saying his arm is still what it was. I have no clue. But as a football coach, his arm strength would be the least of my concerns - he still has five months before the season starts, and that's plenty of time to get his arm back in throwing shape (if he has indeed stopped throwing).
if Paulus is clearly that much better than the scout-team types we have as depth right now and has all the talent and potential of his four-star days as a high schooler, why didn't RR offer right then and there when Paulus was watching practice?
You are thinking about it backwards. I never said I thought he was clearly much better. I think he'd be unlikely to make it in a game, and unlikely to do anything less than cringe-worthy if he does. However, this would also go for all the scout-team types we have as depth right now. So, as long as Paulus has a greater-than-zero chance to be better than what we currently have, I don't see why we'd want to turn down a free extra ticket in the servicable-backup-qb lottery. Sure all the tickets are long odds, one more ticket does increase our chances.
Or in nerd terms, P(Getting a decent backup out of the guys we currently have) P(Getting a decent backup out the guys we currently have and Paulus).
You know the Packers wanted to take a look at him don't you? NFL teams tend to not waste time evaluating players they think have no potential whatsoever especially with the draft right around the corner. So, he must have some talent.