Penn State
So, we have 2 weeks to prepare for Penn State - road game, at night, white out and an electric PSU student section.
PSU seems beatable and I think we will win.
Would it be wise to use Tate? Start Denard, but if the offense becomes stagnant put in Tate with his slightly different style and skill set. I felt that we should have done that against MSU and it will be hard for opponents to prepare for both Denard and Tate.
PSU has young QBs, try to stop the run and force him to beat us in the air...maybe a few ints?
October 17th, 2010 at 4:48 PM ^
I'm fairly certain that most QB's we "force" to beat us through the air will probably do just that.
October 17th, 2010 at 5:03 PM ^
Agreed. Even with an inexperienced QB, they will find a way to put up point and our offense will need to answer back. Since Denards arm is not totally connected to the rest of his body, I think Tate will get some playing time.
October 17th, 2010 at 6:46 PM ^
We forced them to embarrass us but lose a close game through the air. That's what I'm talking about baby.
October 17th, 2010 at 4:48 PM ^
I say stick with Denard, if Rich Rod is going to be here next year, we need Denard to play in this game and learn something from it. I think in the big picture Denard gives us the best chance to win now and in the future. In all of Tate's greatness this past weekend, he still made some bad decisions.
October 17th, 2010 at 4:51 PM ^
Oh, are we not just naming off Big 10 schools?
October 17th, 2010 at 5:24 PM ^
Never mind.
Or to borrow a phrase, "To #&!! with Notre Dame!"
October 17th, 2010 at 10:16 PM ^
start the thread right then if thats what were doing.... Penn Shhhhhtaaaateee
October 17th, 2010 at 4:52 PM ^
I call Wisconsin
October 17th, 2010 at 4:54 PM ^
we really need a good defensive performance to win. Offense needs to click as well. We just arent that talented yet, it will come with time tho!
October 17th, 2010 at 4:55 PM ^
I agree with the sentiment that Denard needs to play the whole game. In the event that he goes down, then Tate can play. We need some consistency at QB and constantly switching them in and out is not going to help right now. Denard is the leader of this team.
October 17th, 2010 at 4:58 PM ^
Denard will have a good day against PSU. he'll be fresh and his speed will dominate.
Another point I expect a healthy shaw and a bruising hopkins as well
October 17th, 2010 at 5:11 PM ^
Speaking of Hopkins, anyone else think he needs the ball more than Smith?
October 17th, 2010 at 5:14 PM ^
I would like to see Hopkins get more carries too.
October 17th, 2010 at 5:49 PM ^
yes hopkins should of been carrying the ball when smith fumbled.. We went away from him and idk why. Hopefully toussaint will be ready to go for the PSU game as well?
October 17th, 2010 at 9:23 PM ^
Im guessing Rodriguez is seeing the same tape as we are and sees the possibilities with Hopkins (prob why he recruited him) but I am not a fan of V Smith. He has some nice moments but I mos def would like to see a Shaw/Hopkins combo at RB. Michigan lacks that big bruiser back which they might have in Hopkins, especially as he improves every week.
There may have been some defectors but Im still all in for Michigan!
October 17th, 2010 at 5:05 PM ^
I think DR is going to rebound against PSU. The 2 weeks off practice and rest will help him and the team prepare for the night game. I'll be surprised if they come off flat or mistake prone.
October 17th, 2010 at 5:06 PM ^
Our injured players will get healthy. Shaw, Fitz, Martin, Molk, D Rob,Mouton, and Floyd
More practice time for Demens and Hopkins to be major contributors in the game.
Both D Rob and Tate have show they can move the ball and they each bring something different to the table. I wouldn't mind seeing them split playing time since we are sure to need them both from here on out.
It would be a nightmare for opposing defenses to prepare for both of them.
I see Michigan coming out strong in the PSU game.
October 17th, 2010 at 5:09 PM ^
Consistancy wasn't really needed last game; Tate came in and did well enough. I like Denard as the starting QB, but don't use the consistancy argument--it's not tenable. To repeat, I do like Denard as the starting QB, I just disagree with that reason for him starting.
The PSU game is a big one (hasn't that been said a million times...). If we win this game we're bowl eligable and likely to get 8 wins. If we lose, the RR haters continue their shit. Reasons why this is winnable:
1.) Their O sucks. Royster has only 388 yards, and that's 2/5 of Denard's total. Boldin is turrible. 4/7 TD/INT ratio and 56% completion %. This is a Freshman that we can get our picks against. Also, He's not a runner (.5 ypc average).
2.) WE JUST HAD 522 YARDS AGAINST A TOP 5 D!!! Our offense will click. You can say what you want about the MSU game, but for as much detraction as that warrants, the rest of the season warrants more benefication. Our O will again gain over 500 against a mediocre PSU Defense.
3. )TOM: they are about as inexperienced as we are in the talent positions. This will lead to an equal TOM. (see the tracking TOM diary posted earlier today.)
4.) They have a lot of injuries. While Molk, Denard, and Martin should all be back and healthy (not to mention Shaw) their will have another game this week, and should not be as healthy as we are.
5.) Demens is now playing Mike instead of he-who-shall-not-be-named.
October 17th, 2010 at 5:14 PM ^
I like how Demens played on saturday, but I think Voldemort is way more intimidating...
October 17th, 2010 at 5:37 PM ^
Start Denard. The offense simply has greater upside with a 1,000-yard rusher playing at QB. He just needs to settle down and be confident in his decision-making. The last two weeks he's gone through bouts of indecision that are normal for new starters. The best way to get over them is to play through them. Tate may be the better option if we're in a situation where we have to throw every down, but otherwise I would not play him.
October 17th, 2010 at 6:53 PM ^
Guess what? Illinois put up over 280 on the ground versus Penn State and the game was in Happy Valley! I think we have a better (and faster) qb in Denard and I also like our line much more. I see us going into Happy Valley and pounding the ball behind Lewan.
I really was irritated before the season about all the hype ND and Penn State got. We have to win this game and then beat Illinois and Purdue. I pray we can get a win versus Wisconsin, but call me a homer, I think Ohio State is the game to win.
I know it's on the road and chances are slim, but I don't really fear OSU's offense. Pryor still can't throw and you just have to contain him. Easier said than done with our defense. Wisconsin showed that you can run on OSU.
October 17th, 2010 at 7:12 PM ^
...but give Tate at least two drives as a changeup, maybe more if the results are positive.
October 17th, 2010 at 8:13 PM ^
Start Denard and put in Tate as a change up only if Denard is struggling or gets dinged again. If Denard is moving the offense well, and scoring, stay with him.
October 17th, 2010 at 9:03 PM ^
Am I the only one who thinks playing in Happy Valley at night is a bit overblown? I know they have their "white out" and "best show in college football" and all...but this team is still not very good team. After all this team did lose to Iowa by 2 at Kinnick at night last year which is a darn tough environment to play in too.
October 17th, 2010 at 9:32 PM ^
playing at PSU is any more difficult than Madison, Iowa City or for us even East Lansing. Columbus tops them all easily.
For the sake of just feeling good and regaining some positives, Michigan really needs to win this game. PSU will be coming off a win over beleaguered Minnesota, they should be brimming with confidence.
October 17th, 2010 at 9:39 PM ^
Bolden is gonna make mistakes. I think it s just a matter of playing opportunistic D..
October 18th, 2010 at 9:03 AM ^
OMG are we screwed if this is the case.
UM Football 2010 is all about outscoring the other team. Unfortunately, the D cannot be relied upon this year.
No mistakes on offense and we win.
October 17th, 2010 at 10:43 PM ^
Name 1 time in college football history when a team has had 2 Quarterbacks and been successful. I have a feeling that someone is going to mention Chris Leak and Tim Tebow but if I recall correctly Leak was a senior and Tebow was a freshman. At that point you have to get Tebow snaps and game time experience. Having 2 starting quarterbacks for 3 years is a recipe for disaster. I would rather suffer through this year, let Denard make mistakes (and assumingly learn from them), work on his passing game, and come back next year as a junior that much better. This year is an 8-4 season with a chance at 9-3 and an equally good chance of 7-5. Stop being impatient and looking for a quick fix. It's not coming this year.
As for Penn State I was far more worried about Indiana than I am this game. I was going to list Penn States national defense ranks also but I think its safe to assume that our offense can move the ball on any team in the country and, as long as we don't keep making the same mistakes, score on any team in the country. Here is a look at Penn States offensive ranks.
Penn State:
Total Offense: 85th
Rushing Offense: 85th
Passing Offense: 76th
Scoring Offense: 108th
Now I know that our defense is at bad if not worse than their offense but those numbers aren't making me shake in my boots to say the least. Just my 2 cents.
October 17th, 2010 at 10:55 PM ^
I'm not sure you're wrong about a two quarterback system... It definitely is a risk, but I think one that might be worthwhile this year (especially if Denard is still having difficulty throwing the ball). I woudl be interested to see if anyone does have some examples of two QB systems that worked well.
As for your claim that the Gators had to get Tebow into the game to give him experience, that's ridiculous. He was a freshman, they put him in because he was a dynamic player. That 2006 team was loaded with talent, they weren't about to risk losing games because they wanted to give Tebow game experience. They won the MNC that year, remember?
October 17th, 2010 at 11:10 PM ^
I do remember but you're honestly going to try and tell me that with Leak graduating they didn't want to get their true freshman quarterback reps and game time? I will have to do some research to see if they ever put Tebow in while trailing (outside of possible goal line situations) or if he only played while they were ahead. That will tell the whole story.
October 17th, 2010 at 11:07 PM ^
Name 1 time in college football history when a team has had 2 Quarterbacks and been successful.
In 1996 and '97, OSU played Stanley Jackson in the first quarter and Joe Germaine in the second. The QB who played best got the nod for the second half. OSU went 11-1 and 10-3 those two years.
That said, I think we should stick with Denard.
October 18th, 2010 at 10:51 AM ^
Our current coach has a history too. 2005 11-1 with Pat White and Adam Bednarik.
http://www.msnsportsnet.com/page.cfm?story=8205
Bednarik played in 9 games and White in 12
October 17th, 2010 at 10:46 PM ^
With Denard in they control the clock and tempo better. Tate is better at one thing..Passing. Tate should only come in if were down 21 and need to move the ball quickly with using little clock.
October 17th, 2010 at 11:19 PM ^
At least according to Terry Foster. Some jems,
- Tate led a false comeback
- They just can't beat real teams once the Big Ten season begins
- The Wolverines are doomed either way. It does not matter who leads the Wolverines at quarterback. Denard Robinson and Forcier are the same quarterbacks.
- Neither of them read defenses well when they get behind.
- Robinson sees ghosts that are not there. And Forcier sees openings that are not there.
http://apps.detnews.com/apps/blogs/terryfosterblog/index.php?blogid=1952
October 18th, 2010 at 1:09 AM ^
this is the perfect time for a bye week. We just played two tough games, and the next is on the road in a hostile environment, but against a vulnerable team. This is also a good chance for Denard to settle down a little bit.
October 18th, 2010 at 1:18 AM ^
Hopefully Minnesota roughs up Penn State for us a bit next weekend.
October 18th, 2010 at 8:48 AM ^
Interm head coach, I don't know if thats a good or bad thing for them. Do they rally behind the coach or fold up the tents?
October 18th, 2010 at 11:53 AM ^
Hopefully they play like they have nothing to lose.
October 18th, 2010 at 11:02 AM ^
I'll be there in two weeks to see what all the fuss is about regarding these silly nite games.
BTW, didn't RR already state right after the Iowa game that Denard is our starting QB. Tate's nice comeback aside, I still feel that Denard gives us the best chance to win. Once again, I don't feel like Iowa beat us so much as we beat ourselves. It's definitely an excuse, but one that I feel justified in sticking with. Unforced errors make it damn near impossible to win ballgames.
THROW THE BALL AWAY AND LIVE TO PLAY ANOTHER DAY!