OMG SO MUCH INFORMATION!! <head explodes>
Practice Recap from GBMW
I believe you mean "head asplode"?
but I now have carpal tunnel symptoms in my pointer figer from scrolling down so much...dam'n, that's a big b*%$h!!!
I know it's not paywalled, but it seems a little more reasonable to send people to their site; I'm sure they feed off of page clicks like everyone else, grammar issues or not. Instructions for accessing their forum here:
You're absolutely right. I apologize.
Thank you for providing the link.
It's worth noting that this is but one practice report entry. They have many more (although not as long and in-depth as this one). I'd be shocked if everyone that isn't an enthusiastic mgoblog member doesn't find a lot of interesting or noteworthy information that could spur discussion on their forum. No, I have no affiliation with that blog whatsoever...
I agree that was a great analysis of the weekend's practices. It was pretty long but it was very nice of him to take the time to provide such a thorough breakdown of what he saw.
Completely agree. I would've liked the post a lot more without his proliferation of editorial opinion. Half the post was all about the author and his notions last year vs. this, etc. Also, needs MOAR PAD LEVEL. Finally, it's a bummer Brian doesn't have this kind of access; I realize he's not a coach, though. Hopefully Magnus got to go and will have a writeup; the author of this piece is...not good. I'd rather have a more trustworthy/less egotistical (when it comes to his own infallibility vis-a-vis football knowledge) messenger for this message.
That's why I tried to clip out the most relevant pieces of information for our purposes on this site so that we all don't have to slog through the opinion parts of the article.
And you have answered my question.
Absolutely. Since when did mgoblog become the bastion of opinionless journalism!? Last I heard many of us were wondering when Brian was going to get out from his Hoke funk, but these guys compare the two staffs and ANGAR. Come on, at least these guys have actually MET the staff and seen them in action in practice.
I completely agree.
I wasn't a RichRod hater but if you couldn't see something wrong with the program over the last few years, you had to be wearing blinders. When you see virtually no improvement in 2/3 of the game over the course of the season, it tells you something about coaching.
What I found most interesting is the QB comparison and frankly, I think it seems to be on the mark. I am hoping that Denard has tremendous growth between now and September. Having said that, I showed up at least an hour early for each of the seven games last year and spent most of the time focusing upon the QB's (lke, whoe doesn't). Devin, for the bulk of the season, always threw the best ball of the three, particularly the long ball. The other point about the QB's was that RichRod might have been giving us a line, but it seemed until mid-week before the opener against CT, he hadn't picked a QB. Since at that time Tate was in the dog house, the competition was Denard and Devin. Denard's runnning and early season success as a passer made the choice a good one, but there were certainly questions.
I am keeping my fingers crossed that Denard will make huge progress.
Today, Will Campbell was the best defensive player on the field, with 2-3 plays where he just beat his man and blew up a ball carrier in the backfield, and numerous others where he generated a push and forced a QB out of his comfort zone. He was also running with both the 1's and 2's - the staff clearly wants him to get as many reps as possible.
The next play I see Craig Roh make will the first such occurrence I witness this spring.
The Big Will and Underachieving/Mismanaged Roh saga continues.
They don't blow smoke selling a product or get into the games to keep readers, they just report what they see and know. I have known them for yrs and they do a very good job.
the football breakdown is great for even a novice to read, yeah some may want a much heavier analysis but that would only bore to tears the casual fan as only the most ardent football fans want the total statistical breakdown with player actions responsibilities and everything else.
Grammer, if you want it written by an english major buy a magazine, if you want it free by those who attend and love michigan football enough to share it, go to their website.
I agree, I wasn't trying to knock them. I was just trying to point out the fact that some people on here have knocked them in the past and wanted to preemptively address that.
I always enjoyed reading their material because they seem to be at almost every practice.
However, some grammar would be nice!
Spelling grammar correctly probably would have helped you on this one.
I've read a bit from that site in the past, but the writers try too hard to show how smart they are. Eventually, I just start taking everything there with a grain of salt.
You're the only one calling him a "writer". Pretty much everyone else understands that he's a high school football coach reporting on what he saw over a few days of practice and speeches. I'm interested to hear why you're applying such high journalistic standards to a practice report from a HS coach. Not sure what he should have to do to earn credibility in your eyes. Have you read his prior posts, or followed the blog? Far as I know, he and his GBMW buddies are the only people who actually have ANY first-hand inside knowledge of practice, under Hoke or RR. If you deem that worthless, then your loss I guess. Stick around here for more David Foster Wallace-esque emo essays then, I guess. Those get us pretty far. /Rant
We're not going to agree on this topic which is fine, but I would just say that it's free information that is not available to you or I anywhere else, and that they did not have to post it. Take it or leave it, but no need to disparage the poster. They're allowed to have their own opinions (God knows everyone else does). I feel fortunate to get to read about what's happening in practice. At the end of the day, it's entertainment after all. I'll take it, warts and all, and not complain.
BTW, ready any monday morning column and tell me it is not without bias....or heck read the dfreep and tell me there isn't bias and had not been bias the previous 3yrs and they they are the paid professionals. Heck complaining about bias here is actually pretty funny because as much as I read those guys had some bias against Rich answer me how much bias Brian and a great many here had against Brady Hoke being hired and carried that bias even to a degree now. I am sure the crickets will be loud on that cause everyone has their biased opinions.
BTW, I have talked with these guys indepth about football and what you get on the blog is a scaled back version. You want the deep down x's and o's, coach over there can break it down with the best out there, problem is he gets another 100 responses to explain what he just said so typically he dumbs down the talk to what most everyone is familiar with.
These guys liked Rich if you knew them, but what they say is plain as day obvious. When reports came out and I heard it from more then them that Rich would stop defensive coaches from correcting on field mistakes in practice and tell them to let them get the reps in, it clearly made sense what these guys were reporting, ie practice was about drills, reps and getting them done in the allowed time for that drill/station.....idea was get them doing the same thing over and over not about correcting bad fundamentals....they hoped repetition fixed it....... It also proved the point the practice was for the offense because Rich's offense depends on rythem so no defensive adjustment was going to ruin that adjustment. It also told you the reports of defensive improvement the previous yrs were accurate, just against Rich's offense since that is what they practiced against.
If you want great spelling, punctuation and sentence structure coupled with great story telling then go to barnes and nobel or the writer's blogs.........
You and the people at GBMW are butt buddies. You pop up everytime someone makes fun of those slackjawed neck beards.
BTW, to say they don't blow smoke is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. They blow smoke right up the asses of all of the other people Beaver banned from Scout.
BTW, Brian gets called out his hatred of Hoke in nearly every single thing he writes.
...aside from a handful of "wow" moments – both running AND passing – Denard was pretty bad today, mostly as a result of a mind-boggling FIVE turnovers in 11-on-11 play – he was picked three times and fumbled two snaps from under center.
Denard today presented the appearance of a quarterback going through the growing pains of learning a new system, and also feeling some competition. One troubling moment came when the first team was giving way to the second team, and Devin held his hand out to give Denard a little low-five, and Denard just turned his shoulder and walked right by him. By the end of practice today, everything about Denard's body language said he was in the ballpark of wit's end.
For the record, in a discussion of how QB's and WR's communicate pre-snap, I picked up this tidbit: Cullen Christian's interception of Denard Robinson yesterday was actually the WR's fault – he gave Denard the wrong hand signal on the coverage he was reading, Denard threw a back shoulder fade, but the receiver never looked back and it was an easy matter for any corner to step in and pick it. So let's take one of those three picks off Denard's stat sheet from Thursday! :)
i always thought denard was going to be just fine.
reading this longggggggggg article makes me want to panic. he compared denard to threet. thats very threatening...
Not to mention uncalled for. There are a heck of a lot of RR jabs in this post.
For fucks sake...if RichRod didn't do anything and he was so horrible, how did he get a guy compared to Threet in the article into the heisman race. I expect you to never talk about how good Denard or Gardner are as RichRod didn't do anything of note when he was here
I love when people trot out RichRod's record as the end all of any discussion on whether he did anything positive here, completely ignoring our current coach's losing record as a head coach.
My point, which was stated lower in the thread by another poster, is that it amazes me to hear everyone say RichRod didn't adapt and and that Gardner will pass Robinson because he isn't a great QB all the while completely ignoring that Robinson broke ncaa records last year as a first year starter so I doubt he is a poor QB.
The poster I was replying to said that RichRod deserves to be basically shit on because he didn't accomplish anything at Michigan. He not only brought us denard but the best offense we've seen at Michigan in decades. If you see that as nothing....great. I just don't see a reason to throw unprovoked jabs at a man who put his heart into Michigan football for 3 years
Threet level midnight.
Why do you just keep posting snippets from the write-up with little-to-no commentary of your own?
You're welcome. And you obviously didn't read my discussion with WolvinLA2 earlier.
Hoke lets his assistants coach. Last year, the main voice you would hear was Rich's. Not so anymore. Hoke pokes his nose in, but he does a lot more listening than talking while everyone is doing their work. He recognizes that this time is (countably) valuable… and him yapping is a waste of everyone's time. He has much more of an "executive presence" than Rich did.
Mattison is very hands-on with the defensive line. There is just so much more defensive coaching going on now. Last year it was clear that the defense's job was to prepare the offense, and stopping the other team would be nothing more than a bonus. The entire approach to defense is different now.
Man, if that strike system for going to class applied to my academic career, i would get kicked out of school every two weeks.
"I realize that this is EXTREMELY long, but I thought most people would enjoy it"
That's what I said
Yesterday I had wondered if Fitzgerald Toussaint had regained his track speed. I got my answer on that today: NO. He popped through a hole on a 3rd & 4 play and broke for the open field… and got run down easily from behind by Thomas Gordon.
The pecking order is starting to show itself at RB and slot receiver.
RB: Cox, Hopkins (gaining), Toussaint (falling), Shaw, Smith, T. Jones (injured)
SL: Roundtree, Dileo (gaining), T. Robinson, Grady, Gallon – and we have seen Stokes, Stonum and Odoms all line up there at times.
This staff LOVES Drew Dileo. He has passed up all the slots but Roundtree, and they will not keep running Tree out there if he keeps dropping balls.
Maybe Mattison was really impressed what a under-sized, "gritty" slot receiver like Wes Welker can do in a pro-offense. He had to face him plenty when the Ravens played NE
If Dileo is our Wes Welker, who is our Danny Woodhead?
Maybe Mattison was really impressed what a under-sized,
"gritty"white slot receiver
NOT EVERY WHITE SLOT RECEIVER IS THE NEXT WES WELKER
Those are the Rules.
Possibly, but as an aside, does anyone else despise how every sports discussion with someone from Boston ends up with a comparison to a Boston/New England player? I gave up talking to one of my roomates back in the day when a conversation about the '85 Bears ended up with talking about awesome Ty Warren was.
I've recently started reading their posts because they seem to have pretty consistant reports of the spring practices. Overall, I really enjoy reading the reports. Although as someone said earlier, there are quite often little shots at the previous coaching staff. But then again, it might just be for comparison's sake. Also, some over there have a serious hard-on for Devin being the QB and Denard being our starting RB. All-in-all, I suggest checking out all the reports, but just keep any feelings on panic or joy caused by such reporting in check. It is only spring after all.
Let me say - if we had anything for QB depth behind Gardner, having DG as the starting QB and Denard as a Percy Harvin or Reggie Bush type do-it-all back, that would be best-case scenario. We really don't have that, so I don't think it's a good idea.
However, after we get Zeke Pike next year and Bellomy with a full year to learn the offense and Denard realizes he has a better shot in the NFL at a different position...maybe this happens.
I actually totally agree with you here. Not to mention that Devin is basically still a RS freshman. If he gets thrown into the pressure cooker of a B1G season like DR did, he's gonna make the same mistakes. Being good against our 2nd D is unfortunatly, just not a realistic test.
Now another season under his belt, and if he's still growing into that ridiculously high ceiling if his? Well then, we could really have something there.
Great Idea - replace the B10 POY with a RS freshman QB. These suggestions are completely assinine. Denard is our QB and Devin will have his own 2 years AFTER Denard graduates. Until then, he will be a very servicable backup.
I think the logical thing to do would be paying attention to last years on the field results, what the Michigan coaches are saying. And put a proper amount of faith in the opinion of a Michigan High School coach.
That seems to be letting facts work rather well with my logic don't you think?
Does the mere fact that somebody is an unidentified high school coach in Michigan mean that his views should be accepted automatically? Why? Who is he? Why the anonymity? How do we know whether he's a knucklehead or not? If he wants to put his opinions out there about who should be starting and who sucks right now and the many ways RR was not a Michigan man, why not stand behind those opinions with his real identity?
When Brian Cook, Tom Van Haaren, Sam Webb, Chris Balas, Josh Helmholdt, or Angelique Chengelis write about what they observe at practice or on the recruiting trail or during games, we know where to go to for follow-up and clarification. Whether we agree with them or not, they're willing to publicly stand behind their statements. If somebody is not willing to do that, then I'm going to take everything they say with a lot of salt, just like all other anonymous stuff on the internet.
I'm not at all blaming the OP for anything, btw. All he did was to provide the info.
IMO by saying that Devin is already, a "top three" B10 QB. Come on, that is asinine. Maybe he has that or better POTENTIAL, but to watch a couple of practices and believe that is a serious man crush.
Head explode indeed.
I've read Tolstoy novels that are shorter.
This has to be the longest board post in history, and, its unofficial, but I think it is also longer than my Master's Thesis.
Accept this or don't accept it, but today just as a year ago, there are things that Devin Gardner is simply better at than Denard Robinson.
Devin has a pocket presence that is on another level. There are seniors who have started 20, 30 games who don't have what Devin has.
Devin throws a better deep ball than Denard. Denard has only minimally improved this aspect of his game in the last 12 months. Devin can push a ball 40 yards downfield with a flick of his wrist, and do it with touch. Denard must put his whole body into it, and he just has no feel for the good old fashioned "go route".
And the science of physics and trigonometry dictate that a 6'4" quarterback will be able to see passing lanes and make throws that a 5'11" quarterback cannot.
The play-by-play from Saturday's 1 v 1 and 2 v 2 scrimages at the Big House are very telling as well.
Part of this may be driven by my deep-seeded desire to see Denard continue to kill it on the field, but I was thinking about one aspect to Saturday's scrimmage. I'm guessing that there is a massive drop-off in the quality of the defense between the 1s and 2s. How much of the "Devin is the second-coming" and "Denard is Charly from Flowers for Algernon" talk is simply due to the massive drop-off in D?
Granted the guy backs a lot of his claims up with further analysis and very specific critiques (plus relates it back to performance in practice from earlier in the week), but it just seems a bit hard to swallow (that's what she said).
Like I said, this is probably just my knee-jerk reaction to Denard criticism.
I think you have something here. Our drop off to the 2's on D is significantly greater than on O.
I'm sure we have some walkons playing with the 2nd string D.
playing with the first string D
Do we still consider Kovacs a walk on? I know he is technically, but I stopped considering him a walk on after last off season.
but certainly understand if you don't. He definitely deserves it. But regardless, Tony Anderson has been running with the 1's as the corner opposite Avery.
Good call, I forgot about Tony Anderson. I'm happy to see that a southern California kid is out there competing for a spot. But, on the other hand it just goes to show how thin we are at that position without Woolfolk and JT Floyd.
it's scary as shit
playing on the first string D. Beaten to the punch. That's what happens when you go to reply and the puppies need to go outside.
That indeed is our fear, expresses most often by Brian, of the impact of pro style offense on Denard, which the writer reinforces.
to suggest Molk might not regain his job.
Gotta agree. I hate to pick on one thing in such a huge amount of info, but that's a ridiculous thing to say. The heart and soul for the past two years of a good offensive line and a possible Rimington finalist is not losing his starting job unless injured.
Molk probably won't lose his job, but he isn't a great fit for this system.
Wasn't Molk recruited by Carr and co.?
I read all the way up till the point where he said Molk wasn't guaranteed to have his spot when healthy. Then I realized this guy has no credibility at all. The guy might be an All American this year. What a joke. I'm surprised he didn't say Martin might get beat out.
Also the part where he said Denard was trying to go through all his progressions before he took off running unlike last year. Did the guy watch Denard last year or was he just sitting there yelling Rich Rod sucks the whole game. That was one of Denards problems last year. He almost never took off running on pass plays. There would be big running lanes but he would force a pass to a covered guy instead.
Agree totally. Denard needs to realize that as a running threat, he needs to be more congnisent of running opportunities. This is still early on in the off-season for him. I expect to see large improvements by next fall.
I just don't get that at all. Molk is considered to be one of the best centers in the country next year. Sure, he is a bit small right now, but I just don't see him NOT starting. He is to much an asset for this offensive line. Unless his snapping arm falls off or his weight plummits like Christian Bale in The Machinist, I just don't see him losing his starting position.
to hear this condemnation of Denard after all the positive buzz I've been seeing in other reports.
one observer's impression of a couple days of practice. I wouldn't put too much stock in it. At this point last year, Gardner was taking the No. 1 snaps in practice
consoling me...i still can't wait for saturday's game
there were some reports that Mattison unleashed the defense on Saturday with the intent of confusing the shit out of the offense. success. If that's the case I'll be curoius if the same plays itself out on Saturday. Also, as a nother note:
Yo put a little context in that report: the poster who wrote it does not seem to high opinion on Denard. On GBMW, he has even gone so far as to say our record would have been better last year if Tate was the QB. And points to Denard being pulled three times last season for performance as another reason why Denard's not very good. I still can't figure out what he's talking about in that respect.
I was wondering the same thing about his reference to Denard getting pulled for performance reasons. I don't remember those three games.
I'm pretty sure OSU was one of those games. Heck, it seemed like everyone was getting playing time that day. I thought it was the Delaware State game all over again, in a twisted, heartbreaking, end-of-an-experiment kind of way.
OSU was the game in which Denard and Tate kept alternating drives for a while, right?
That was frustrating and not helpful, as I recall.
It didn't help that we were constantly trying to force 4th and 7s with lots and lots of dropped passes because we didn't have our starting punter (suspended) or a servicable field goal kicker. I believe Denard might have been pulled at some point in the Penn State game as well because the offense was sputtering. (On a related note, apparently Broekhuizen's been stepping his game up a bit, according to this article.)
I'll never forget how often I seemed to see that pretty yellow line with Roundtree about 2-3 feet over it, wide open; he'd get the pass and immediately drop it.
I feel like this happened the entire game. When I think of that game the two images I get are Roundtree dropping passes and Pryor scrambling for 348597 yards a play.
Roundtree had his worst game of the season against OSU. He dropped like 4 or 5 passes IIRC.
Purdue was the game we rotated them. Denard was pulled against OSU after injuring his hand.
Props to the dudes over at GBMW. They pack a lot of information into that site. The setup is a bit difficult to navigate but check them out. You can't get better inside info than this.
Let's of info to process there. But I don't think you can say DG is a top3 B10 QB when the only thing he's done is tear apart a terrible 2nd string defense.
He spoke of being the #1 high school player in he country, and walking into Schembechler Hall on his first day wearing – get this – a NOTRE DAME letter jacket.
"I was a butthole."
Cam Cameron, another cutthroat guy, put his arm around him.
"You were the #1 running in the country, RIcky," he said.
"Yes, I was!"
"You know what we're going to do next year?"
"We're going to recruit the #1 running back in the country again. And you know what we'll do the year after that? We're going to recruit the #1 running back in the country again."
“Oh, and kid… take off that jacket.”
Reminds me of the scene in Ocean's 11. "So you're Bobby Caldwell's kid?" "Yep" "That's great, now get in the god damned house!"
I wish he would have said a "now take off that f....n' jacket"
Can't wait for those times again.....
I hope Ricky can convince Jarrod Wilson to come to Michigan.
As much as I'd love to see Gardner at QB and Dennard at RB, the team simply lacks the depth to do anything like that. With the loss of Tate, our QB depth is scary.
This came up in the over-under thread earlier today, but how is the QB depth scary?
You're talking about getting rid of the incumbent starting QB, so of course the depth will look bad if you do that. But if you don't move Denard, then there's two very capable (I'm skeptical of this guy's doom-laden assessment) QBs. What team isn't in trouble if they get down to their 3rd stringer?
If anything, Michigan's probably is better shape QB wise than most places, with two QBs who are starting caliber.
I think the post was saying that our QB depth is scary if we move Denard to RB. Our QB depth isn't enough to warrant one of the QBs to move to another spot and have everything be OK.
But our QB depth is still a little scary. I agree that most teams would be "in trouble" if they had to play their 3rd stringer, but most would be less in trouble than playing a "meh" rated true frosh who didn't enroll early. Not everyone's third string guy is a future star, but most of them have been on campus for more than a month before the season starts, or if they're a frosh, they're a highly touted frosh.
I think our depth is OK at QB. With scholarship limits, it doesn't make sense to have more than 3 or 4 QBs on the roster. There's the two starters, Jack Kennedy, who apparently has improved a bit over the off-season, and I believe Jeremy Gallon was taking some snaps at QB during the preparations for ntMSU. Gallon also played QB in high school. We aren't asking the third or fourth stringers to do anything major; they could just hand off the ball for a few plays, like what happened in 2010 when Denard needed a second to breathe.
OK might be accurate, but it's nothing better than OK. We have very little drop-off from 1st to 2nd string, but huge, huge drop-off after that. I think most teams bring in a QB every year, maybe 2 every now and then, and have 4 or 5 on the roster at any given time. This would be us essentially if Tate didn't leave. Without Tate, our depth chart goes: Awesome, Awesome, DEATH.
He's a situational backup. Unless Denard and Devin get snapped in half, which would be both catastrophic and highly unlikely, Kennedy won't be needed for much more than garbage time and/or handing the ball off to the RB and/or running a QB keeper to burn clock. Any team losing its top two quarterbacks would be in a lot of trouble.
RR did say that one of his goals was to bring in a QB a year so there is definitely a case to be made for needing more QBs on the roster but compared to the depth on the DL it's far less worrisome.
If Kennedy plays, that is most definitely only good if it is in a laugher.
Putting the only two truely viable QBs on the field at the same time, and subjecting one of them to the pounding a Big10 RB takes, seems to just be asking for trouble to me.
Amidst the renewed "Denard to RB" talk, I was wondering something similar. Denard was essentially the featured back last season, and he couldn't make it through a full game without being banged up. Does he really have the size to take a RB's abuse all season if he was switched? Could he take on blocking duties?*
Granted, he was both the featured back and the QB, so he was a key component on nearly every single offensive play last year, so maybe only taking on RB duties would be easier on him, but I'm not so sure. Plus, he definitely wouldn't be a Hoke-certified power-running, downhill back.
(*Related question about switching Denard to WR, does he have the hands and/or route-running abilities to be a viable WR? I think a lot of people advocating position switches see his athleticism and kind of forgets about the skill sets each skill position requires.)
What team isn't in trouble if they get down to their 3rd string [quarterback]?
Penn State, evidently. *Grumble*
Aw damn. Hoisted with my own petard.
Is anybody suprised devin is looking better than denard?I'm not. Let's face it,denard is a runner not a passer. You just have to be accurate or no defense will respect our passing game.
Did you miss that one part where Denard threw for 2,500 yards, with a 63% completion percentage, and had 18 TDs against 11 INTs?
description of what his ideal SAM is, does anyone thing think Ken Wilkins could fit in great there? He's about that size, right? Minus the coverage skills at least.
Um, last I heard Kenny Wilkins was about 265 and growing. He's almost too big for a DE, and way too big to be a linebacker.
Wow nevermind then. I just remembered him coming in at about 240.
Listen people, this is still spring practice we are talking about here. Devin may very well be looking better than Denard right now, but we have 5 months until the season starts. Devin has the advantage of being physically better suited to play in a pro-style offense. Denard will need the spring and a lot of time working on his own to adjust to the changes. I am confident that Denard will be the starter on September 3rd and we will have a VERY capable backup in Devin if need be.
I agree, lets not forget Denard's work ethic. I'm sure he will put in the extra time in the summer on his own to become great. He did it last year, now he just needs to learn new techniques and footwork. He was time before the season starts to perfect his mistakes.
100% co-sign on this. Denard spent the last offseason with his eyes held open Clockwork Orange style watching film when he wasn't running drills. Have a little faith.
Regarding Pocket presence, I relate it to teaching my pilot training students something called situational awareness back when I was an instructor. Some dudes had more of a natural feel for it than others, but with enough practice everyone got to where they were serviceable. Denard's other gifts are still impressive and he'll eventually develop the pocket presence.
This is why that blog is so frustrating: there's some decent information packed in with extracurricular jabs at the previous coaching staff that are just unwarranted.
I don't understand how they can say something to the effect of this coaching staff adapts to their talent (when the RR's didn't) and then talk ad-nausem about how they are running an offense in which Denard won't be successful.
This is why people like me (and Brian Cook) are worried: Denard turned in a performance of EPIC HISTORIC PROPORTIONS last season as a first-year starter. The solution is NOT to turn him in to a running back, but to run an offense that maximizes his strengths and minimizes his weaknesses.
Obviously this staff is working on coaching him on how to be a pocket passer, and I think he has the ability to do so. It would be a travesty to see one of the best players in Michigan history be relegated to mediocrity because a coaching staff was too arrogant to adapt to the talent they have on hand. (see what I did there?)
This may come as a surprise but the offensive coaches don't care about Denard's sucess and happiness. They want to score points and win games.
Yessir. The coaches need to do what is best for the team to win games.
It is a little eerie how similar the discussions about Denard vs. Devin this year mimic the Tate Denard discussions last year...
Yeah he looked good but he was going against the 2's
He started last year but the other guy is a better fit for the system
He has really worked hard, shown great improvement and seems to have earned a shot
RR lovers are really butthurt on this one. As time plays out I believe we'll continue to hear more and more about the sad state of affairs that was RR and his chronies.
Yes, we need to work with Denard's skill set, but we also need to game plan to win games. Not just the OOC games as happened last year, but also the heart of the B1G schedule. That, IMHO, is the biggest difference between what RR did and what I hope, Coaches Hoke, Borges and Mattison, are doing/will do with what they have to work with on both sides of the ball. This also plays into the Powers statements of whatever is best for the team and what gives them the best chance to win. Either way, it's going to be exciting to see how this all plays out.
First of all, there's no reason for your sarcasm. Especially in the context of an argument you're making that is flawed on a fundamental level. If you're going to be sarcastic, the first rule is to be smart about it.
The intent of my post was two-fold:
1) To point out the inherent hypocrisy of GBMW peeps (and their followers/supporters/minions) in criticizing Rich Rodriguez for not adapting to the talent on hand (Threet running the offense), yet arguing simultaneously that Denard should be a running back,
This argument is so absurd on so many levels that it makes my brain split in half. Michigan had NO returing talent/experience on offense in 2008 REGARDLESS OF SCHEME.
It's okay to not be a RR fan. Hell, the guy didn't give many people reasons to support him. But it is NOT OKAY, especially if we as mgoblog denizens pride our intellectual approach to UM football, to buy into the revisionist BULLSHIT sold by the Free Press and the likes of GBMW.
2) I'm confident our coaches will find a way to maximize the offensive talent we have, which is substantial, in a way that will win us games. The GBMW summary suggests that because Denard is throwing picks while running an unfamiliar offensive scheme, he should be the RB at Michigan is ABSURD for two reasons:
a) He is learning - throwing interceptions and making bad decisions is part of the process;
b) He is one of those once-in-a-generation athletes that demands the offense be built around him. It is that simple. It doesn't matter what scheme you choose, you build an offense around Denard Robinson. PERIOD.
It doesn't matter what NFL teams are doing because this is COLLEGE FOOTBALL. You want your best player to touch the ball every single play.
It is CERTAINLY worth noting that the offense we had last year, with a raw first year starter at QB, was the best Michigan has had in a generation and we're essentially scrapping it.*
*Asterisk for the idiots: I'm not coming out in support of or against the coaching change. At this point I am indifferent. This team has the talent to win 9 or 10 games with the returning talent, but that is contingent on the proper utilization of our OFFENSIVE talent and marginal development on the defensive talent.
Don't know what to make of it. I'll take it as one man's view, and a good analysis. I'll believe the good things and ignore the bad, such is my wont.
We must now also recognize jamiemac's post earlier tonight as the first volley in the Great Michigan QB Battle/Controversy/Extravaganza of 2011.
In my opinion that was one of the most upsetting things about the whole weekend as reported by the GBMW folks.
There is NO EVIDENCE out there that suggests Rich Rodriguez was anything but welcoming to former players. On the other hand, there is PLENTY of evidence that suggests there was a huge faction of former players who were anti-Rich Rodriguez from the beginning. And I'm not even talking about the media, about which everyone with any semblence of intellect knows.
I'm not comfortable with speeches like that (as reported) because that is so divisive and, franlky, counter-productive to the goal of making Michigan a perennial contender for national championships. (Or B1G championships, which is our newly-state goal)
There has to be some legs to the stories about how many former players didn't feel welcome here over the past 3 years. There will be over 300 former players in Ann Arbor for the spring game this weekend. 300! That is crazy and I think the new coaching staff is listening to former players for input and they feel like they need to be a part of the program again.
I think it's equally valid to suggest that some of Lloyd's boys were miffed that one of ... Lloyd's boys didn't get the job. They may not have liked RichRod from the get-go.
Of course, it's also quite possible that RichRod would have rubbed those people the wrong way even if they'd given him a chance. PR didn't seem to be his strong point.
Who really knows?
I agree to a point. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle and he certainly didn't help things out. I will point out: the man was basically called an attention whore for playing score-o....and this was the feeling before he had even coached a game. I think a lot more people felt this way than you or I would guess
Hoke is just being a good politician with this move... and for that matter with a lot of other things he has done and said since he got here? My thought is that Rich Rod probably didn't put as much effort into calling every single former player he could think of because he was busy and didn't see it as a priority. At the same time, I don't think he actively shunned former players that reached out to the program, as evidenced by accounts of former players like Larry Foote who came back to train under Barwis. What I AM sure of, is that somewhere along the way the perception that Rich Rod ignored former players got out there, and Hoke is doing his best to change any widespread negative perceptions leftover from the previous regime. This can be seen in the constant talk about "defense first," fitting "square pegs in round holes," and borderline obsession with rivalries.
Just make generalized comments about every possibility and they are bound to be right about some stuff. Those that want to believe these illiterate folks will point to the things he got "right" while skeptics will continue to point out the spring hype that turns out to be dead wrong.
The guy took his time to state....
☑ What he observed.
☑ His thoughts on what he observed.
☑ Comaprisons to what he observed this year vs last year.
I don't see what the big deal is.
Those that want to believe these illiterate folks will point to the things he got "right"
What's with all the "illiterate" comments? I thought the post was pretty readable. I can forgive a couple of spelling typos in a 1,000-word missive.
is completely fatuous, given that Gardner has virtually no meaningful playing experience against B10 competition. Why don't we wait for actual games before we bestow that kind of accolade on him?
Looking at the other quarterbacks in the Big Ten, doesn't seem too far off. Hell,Zeke Pike could be top three right now and he's in high school. The quarterback play in the conference is not the best right now.
Zeke Pike is not a top 3 QB in the Big Ten right now. He would be third on Michigan's depth chart this year.
Yea it would be ridiculous for a freshman quarterback to be top three in his conference. Can you even name half of the big tens starting qbs off the top of your head? All I was saying was that it's not crazy to think Gardner isnt a top three qb considering the competition.
"All I was saying was that it's not crazy to think Gardner isnt a top three qb considering the competition."
Say what? He's played a few drives the beginning of last season and wasn't overly spectacular in doing it. Now reports from practice say he's improving drastically but there's simply not enough info to put him above at the very least:
Denard, Pryor, Cousins, Persa, and Martinez (probably).
Devin Gardner does not show up in any of the statistics for ANY conference game last year. As far as the box scores available on MGoBlue indicate, he did not play in a single conference game, yet we are supposed to seriously consider the assertion that DG is already a better QB than three of these returning starters.
When DG actually gets, you know, playing time in conference games, we can then determine how good he is.
Cam Newton never started an SEC game before last year,look what he did. Matt Barkley was a freshman and a top three quarterback in his league. Don't act like it can't happen because it can. I'll take the word of the reporter that has been to several practices over,well, you.
No one's saying it isn't possible for freshman QB's to be in the upper echelon in their conference. But other then a few plays last year against inferior competition and the word of random observer of practice, there is nothing to go off of. If you believe that Gardner is a top 3 QB in the conference then that's your opinion. Most people would prefer to wait and see what he can actually do before making a claim like that.
Robinson, Pryor, Cousins, Persa, Bolden/McGloin, Rob Henry, Martinez, Scheelhause.
And yes, it would be ridiculous for Pike to be top three in the conference right now, that's why I just said he wasn't.
And yes, it is crazy to think that Gardner is a top three QB in the big ten right now too.
*Edit: Apparently Don types faster than me and I should have refreshed the page.
We don't know who this guy is—he doesn't identify himself by name—so we have no way to verify anything he's saying. He's counting on us to accept on faith that his observations are accurate. I'm putting it into the "interesting, but not necessarily the truth" category myself.
No, we do not know who he is... but quite frankly Don, to me has far more credibility than many of the privileged a-holes here who have lots of mgo-points, and think they are God.
What are you talking about? I swear, this meme about people thinking they are important around here due to their mgopoints level has as much legitimacy and evidence as the meme that say RR didn't value the alumni players, that is to say, none.
I think the poster is a Russian spy sent to distract Michigan fans so that a revived USSR can invade the state of Michigan, a la Red Dawn. I have more points than you, so I must be right. Until someone with more points than me comes up with an equally plausible explanation.
Or, maybe people don't pay as much attention to points as you think they do.
And Hoke has been coaching the "MICHIGAN program" in Muncie and San Diego all these years? A true leader of men, unlike those coaches who plagued us these past three years? Can someone tell me whether this quantum-leap-forward-in-coaching (a) has a lifetime winning record or (b) has ever won his conference? I won't be mean and ask if he has ever made it to a BCS bowl, much less won one. I get it -- RR and co. were bad, didn't get Michigan, can't coach a lick. Hoke and co. are good, get Michigan, promote toughness and student athletes (don't look into the JUCO thing at SDSU), and have preternatural coaching abilities and love to coach. I wonder why this never translated into a conference champsionship in the past 8 years?
Get over it Man. This post is everything everyone on here can't stand about the Rich Rod forever crowd.
It was just proven with 8 foot strobe lights that the W-L stats by a coach at a smaller conference means zilch at Michigan. Proven by Rodriguez.
Well said Nate.
RichRod wins a national title before Michigan does with Hoke...
You think the MWC is better than the Big East? How many conference titles did Hoke win in the MWC?
You think the MAC is better than the Big East? How many conference titles did Hoke win in the MAC? (Hint, even with a ranked team, he got beat in the conference title game by an unranked Turner Gill-coached squad. Inspiring stuff.)
How many Super Bowls do you think Denver would have won if John Elway was injured in the first quarter? How many Super Bowls do you think that NE would have won if Tom Brady was injured in the first quarter? Or Joe Montana for the 49ers?
How many Rose Bowls against Washington State would we have won if Charles Woodson was injured in the first quarter? How many NC games against USC would Texas have won if VY was injured in the first quarter?
Would you then claim that all these teams were "overly reliant on one star player?"
Brady Hoke has a national title ring. So does Greg Mattison. And Al Borges should have one (having coordinated a 12-0 Auburn team). All three of these guys know what it takes to have a perfect season.
RR does not have a ring. And unless he has an epiphany regarding the importance of defense - and the importance of keeping an undersized QB healthy - I don't see him winning one.
So, by what logic is the answer is to hire a coach with a much worse W-L record in much smaller conferences? I understand that a certain contingent has always and will forever hate RR, but these kinds of posts simply make no sense.
It was just proven with 8 foot strobe lights that the W-L stats by a coach at a smaller conference means zilch at Michigan. Proven by Rodriguez.
Yes, Hoke brings in a worse W-L record, but you gotta look at the situation as a whole. Look at what else he brings in. He brings in Borges, an OC from a 13-0 should have been NC team at Auburn. He brings in Mattison, a DC from Michigan, Florida, and most currently the Baltimore Ravens. And the main thing is, as evident from the practices, he is letting them coach and teach and letting them do what they do best. Lastly, he brings in what will satisfy the "Michigan Men" alum who wants a coach who understands the tradition more and can win over the fans and the media. So yes, taking into account ALL of the factors, I see this as a much better hire than RR, who was unable to bring over Casteel with him when he left.
This is ridiculous. I know we all like hindsight, but saying the Hoke hire now, with his losing record, is better than the RichRod hire at the time, fresh off a season he was 1 game away from the NC game, numerous winning seasons, dominating a conference for the better part of a decade, and a bcs bowl win to boot, is pretty absurd.
Quite the writeup. There's just one thing I find hard to believe:
Last year he made a few nice throws with a defender in his grille because he only had one read on most plays – if it wasn't there, he tucked and ran.
Was this really true? I can hardly remember Denard ever tucking and running on designed pass plays. I can't believe he just had a single read that often.
I think you know the answer to this. I'm not saying that invalidates all or even a part of the OP, but dear God. If you spent a minute and a half, max, watching Denard last year, you would know that this is a completely preposterous statement.
As I have said on numerous occasions, there are many things to be critical of RichRod for, but failure to design a lethal offense is surely not one of them.
I can say with certainty that I spent more time reading this than any other single article/chapter all semester.
Nice to hear they're doing full contact drills. Didn't RR say they didn't do much of that due to lack of depth? I think that's what I pinned for poor tackling last year.
NM...and not serious..kind of
i can't wait until chris rock and michael schofield are both starting, than someone else can relive the pain that i went thru trying to find out scouting information for them.
(If the poster meant to help the current coaching staff - EPIC FAIL!)
My tampons smell like roses, pal.
What language is this?
And to think, I've been wasting so much time reading the whinings of the board "populate" when really I was just jealous of GBMW. All it took was your eloquent exposition above to show me the error of my ways.
Thank you Hoken's Heroes....thank you.
And yet, you've visited this board enough to accumulate almost 4000 points and have been a member for 2 years.
Don't think you're only coming here for Tom...
Jealous of GBMW? Really? Jealous of the illiterate GBMW site admin who got run off Scout for being a DB? Or jealous of the "insider" who got kicked off GoBlueWolverine for posting false info about a practice he was supposedly at? It's funny you'd call people on this site a bunch of whiners, when GBMW is full of butthurt whiners who take any opportunity they can to take shots at the former coaching staff and the site they used to be associated with.
I'm tempted to say tl;dr but I can't lie -- I read the whole thing. It hurt my head a bit, yes, but after applying a filter I was able to enjoy the content. I think there's good stuff in there.
Could they maybe enlist a volunteer student (or maybe just a sharp 9th-grader who did well in grammar) to wordsmith their posts? How nice would that be?
Love the 'raw feed' from the practice and some of the anecdotes about Coach and Ricky Powers. No idea whatsoever about the more editorial stuff. I find it hard to imagine that we can't take one of the most exciting players in the country to line up under center and make it work.....
The quality of their writing has gotten better, though, since the golden days of PAD LEVEL.
(PS: No, I'm not them)
I have observed probably half of the practices this spring and cosign much of this report. He has some obvious prejudices though.
He is fairly accurate in stating that the first string DL is probably the best unit on the team. The second string D is really not all that good, or at the very least not ready outside of Black,T. Gordon,Robinson, and Jake Ryan. Cullen Christian will be a solid player eventually, but he needs a little more seasoning. He was way too hard on Marvin Robinson at this point in time with the looks like Tarzan, plays like Jane bit. The scheduled practices are Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday, and Marvin has class on Tuesday, so obviously missing 1/3 of the practices will put him behind the others. He is currently backing up Carvin at FS, but Marvin will be in the rotation somewhere, possibly at both safety positions. Ideally, I think he takes a run at Jordan Kovacs this fall.
He is fairly accurate that there is nobody that is taking hold of the RB position and making themselves the clear #1. The coaches are very eager to get Thomas Rawls on campus.
I am not sure if the Talbott brothers will ever be much of a factor. Terry recently had back surgery, and Terrance missed a lot of the spring because he was contemplating how bad he really wanted to play football in the offseason. He had left the team for a few, but is back now, and has to earn his way back.
He is accurate that Drew Dileo is burning up the depth chart, and that Devin Gardner will be a stud in this league.
He was on the money with Denard struggling the past couple of days, but let me provide some context. Denard had been doing pretty well the first couple of weeks. He has started to struggle as spring went on as he had to grasp more and more of the offense. Making a college offense 2nd nature has been Denard's biggest struggle as soon as he has stepped on campus. I am not saying he is dumb by any means, because he is a very bright kid. However, when things start moving fast for him, he gets excited, and thinks about things way too much rather than just trusting what he is seeing out there. Rich only ran about 60% of his offense as well with Denard because Denard would overthink things too much. He has such a strong desire to be a perfect quarterback that he sometimes doesn't rely enough on his God given talents, and trusting what he sees. He can make every throw in this offense with accuracy. He just needs more reps to gain some much needed comfort, and probably a break from the pressure of practice to study on his own. Being comfortable in the offense has been Devin's largest tangible advantage over Denard over two coaching regimes now besides the obvious protypical size.
He also mentioned that he would feel more comfortable with a healthy TW at FS. TW will be coming back at corner, and there is a fingers crossed vibe that Troy will even be the same player he was. Troy had a pretty devastating injury. Carvin has pretty much locked down the starting FS position as of now barring a bad summer. Besides of the obvious players who are already proven, Carvin, Cam, and Jake Ryan have been the most impressive defenders that I have seen when I was around.
What I take huge exception were his obvious prejudices about Rich Rodriguez. Rich made a lot of mistakes over his tenure here, but making past players feel welcome was not one of him. His bias got in the way of accurately telling the stories of the vibe of the coaching clinic week during the Rodriguez era as well. I am good friends with Gary Moeller, so I have had pretty good access to the past 3 coaching regimes, and Gary was always at practice during the Rodriguez era, and was very supportive of Rich. Jerry Hanlon was always at practice. There were always former players around when Rich was there, and he encouraged the players that were there to tell others to stop by as well. There was really no need to bring up the former staff in his report.
"Terry recently had back surgery ..."
Ouch. He wasn't a highly rated recruit, but it hurts to hear that.
"He can make every throw in this offense with accuracy. He just needs more reps to gain some much needed comfort, and probably a break from the pressure of practice to study on his own."
I'm sure the coaches are trying to get him up to speed as quick as possible as they only have 15 practices. That's a lot of information to process. Given the summer to digest the information, I think we will see a different Denard in the fall practice.
And using last summer as evidence, I think we can be pretty confident that Denard will put in the work necessary to bring himself up to speed with the new offense.
It should be noted that GBMW staff had Denard as one of the top players just a few days ago: http://gbmwolverine.com/2011/04/03/michigan-football-tidbits-spring-practice-8-report-%e2%80%94-top-5/
Any more practice insights like this are very much appreciated
If you can field a question, where is Elliot Mealer? Not sure I've seen him all Spring
Elliot has been banged up this spring as well.
The GBMW staff? That always makes me giggle like a little school girl.
needed perspective here.
If indeed you also have firsthand witness account, could you adress the following contrasts addressed by the OP.
1. These guys are coaching the D, not just standing there with thumb in ass while RR does all the yelling.
2. The D is being coached as a D rather than just to help the O
3. Guys are communicating more with eachother on the field
These are the contrasts presented by the OP that interest me the most, not the editorial stuff about Ricky Powers etc.
Instead of nit picking like one of those snob judges on Dancing with the Stars or whatever, we should thank this person for bringing us first-hand observations and valuable insight. He was there, he took copious notes, he wrote a long detailed piece to share with others. He is giving great value to the community here. I say make it a diary. Granted, it isn't overloaded with supposedly meaningful stats that most of us have never heard of. It also isn't oozing with unproven conspiracy theories about how prior coaches were done in or the new coach was selected.
So maybe it isn't diary or feature post worthy. Until proven otherwise by events, this is akin to a really good TomVH update about recruiting as far as value.
MGoBlog typically does not turn 100% copy and pasted posts from other blogs into diaries. Diaries are for original information, which this would be, if GFord was the person who chose to post it here.
passing this blog by a mile. the brain cook needs to concentrate less on his witty writing style and amatuer analysis and get in there and dig for more observations.
i could be rong,. but......
It might be more like kumquats and raisins. I'm sure plenty of people read both sites, and I'd also like to see more detailed information here, but that doesn't seem to be MGoBlog's main purpose. The "witty writing" is its principal appeal to some people.
Maybe for some, but IMO this site's most interesting feature is the UFR and other in-depth analysis. I think there could be a little more in that area right now. I'd like to see some analysis of what SDSU did last season, for instance.
and...Mike Cox will start at RB in the Fall. Book it. :-)
1. Big Will is finally going to be who we thought.
2. Coaching staff are true teachers of the game.
and the third and a little unnerving point.
3. Denard has a lot of work to do!! Thankfully it's only April. I will be watching for signs over the summer, no matter how crazy they might be, that Devin is a possible starter. I know everyone says Big 10 POY last year!!!, but that was under an offense meant for him and his mad running skills. I'm hoping he can develop the passing skills necessary to run this offense. No matter how much they coach him up, though, it's hard to teach accuracy. He has arm strength, but accuracy is almost a god-given talent that is hard to learn.
I truly hope he can make that transition, but maybe they should give Devin some reps at 1st string D to see what happens. If he still does as well as reported, than we may have a QB controversy (shoot me now).
IT IS ONE PRACTICE.
You people KNOW Denard is good, right? You saw him, right? You watched last year, like me?
Who are you people?
We need to remember that right now Denard is being challenged to learn as much of the offense as possible. Alot of it is stuff he doesn't do all that well in. For the long-term trajectory of the program, it is important that this offense be installed. But buring the season, a game plan will be put together that emphasizes what Denard does best, both passing and running. So let's not all panic over this.
This has probably been said on this thread, but:
It seems that Gardner was more impressive than Denard on Saturday.
But it still mystifies me how the author of this post, and people on this board (several on this thread, Jamiemac's thread yesterday) seem to be predicting Robinson's demise. He was the top rated PASSER in the B10 last year. First-team all-conference. First team all-american. He's one of the hardest workers, the unquestioned leader, and universally beloved by his team. Virtually all of the practice chatter up until Saturday was VERY positive for him, and Borges has pretty much said that he's the guy.
Yet, 2.5 years of people trying to claim "he's not a quarterback" aside, people are STILL trying to get him out from behind center on this blog. In order to think that he's not our QB, you need to be stubborn or stupid. This was ONE practice on ONE day, with the other guy playing QB against our second team defense (our first team defense, you may recall, was the 3rd worst in NCAA football, so what does that say?).
We've SEEN Denard play the position at a high-level, and it's nearly border-line offensive that people are still predicting his failure.
way to fall...but it seems a short way back to last spring. The OP is taking this line straight from last spring substituting DG for TF. DR and DG will get opportunity - if only because that is CFB in 2011. QBs get knocked around. But to dismiss DR in spring is premature...and stupid (fancy dancer stupid). Not to mention the OP is pretty biased. Let's not lose sight of the fact DR came here over UCF to play QB. He could have been Percy in Florida if he wanted that.
As to the OPs hard on for Hoke. Just win baby. I'm encouraged by the buy in and the report in it's many specifics - but I will ignore the RR dirt and Hoke halo.
Bring on the recruits. Especially the defensive stars.
It's just amusing to watch the latest Spring Practice rumors get annually swallowed by everyone.
Last I checked, "Cam Gordon, Brandon Herron, and Mike Cox: World Destroyers" never happened.
One set of data contains a record breaking season of Denard winning POY in the Big Ten--that everyone saw. But let's ignore all of that because of some rumors from spring practices that a few people none of us know have seen.
Not so much with the logical.
Its one thing to learn a offense through a playbook/chalk talk/drills...but when you have to implement that offense on a live defense your essentially learning it all over again. You have to connect the dots between what you see on the field and what you know in your head. This is a learning curve that Denard will have to work through, but at the end of the day I have full confidence he will be the QB.
He was the top rated PASSER in the B10 last year.
According to the B10 stats, Denard was sixth in passing yardage and seventh in passing efficiency. He was also sixth or seventh in TDs thrown.
He led in total offense, but a large part of that was rushing yardage.
This was the second best post ever... second only to my original "It's All about Denard" post. Thank you.. and its safe to say, that you think Gardner should start in the fall.
Holy excessive copy and paste. I wonder how much the Mods will decide to delete from the OP.
Didn't Maizeman and most of the GBMW guys get kicked off of Scout when they found out they had lied about being at practices for years? This wasn't from Maizeman and coincides with the coaches clinic so there is no reason to believe this dude wasn't actually at practice, but given the GBMW history, it wouldn't surprise me to find out this was yet another fabricated practice report.
Note - After reading through the comments over there, it is very clear that GFord is a Denard hater and Devin fanboy. That's all fine and good, but should be pointed out to those who typically overreact to any negative news about Denard.
I was concerned about his report after the first time I read it, considering a lot of it is opposite of other stuff we've heard. But after reading his comments, I've got to call his objectivity into question. He clearly thinks DR is not a QB and never should have been. But, then again, he could be absolutely correct. Only time will tell.
To say that was it was a long post is the understatement of the year. For the hell of it, I cut and pasted it into Microsoft Word using 12 pt. Arial with 1" margins all the way around. It came in at a whopping twenty-eight -- count 'em, 28 pages!!!! All I can say is wow.
I used to read these guys all the time until I figured out something. They don't know shit.
Ask youselves this. How credible is the info coming from a guy who thinks D. Molk may lose his job?
I think these guys hate D. Molk because 2 years ago they said he was too weak to play the position and would never play at Michigan.
3 years ago they said the practices we're much more intense and that the tempo was insane with more running and hitting compared to Lloyd's country club where everyone stood around.
The number one fallacy of these "observations" is they see a couple plays from a Spring Practice(which is used for teaching not determining depth charts) and projecting forward based on little. M. Robinson may look terrible because he is trying to learn something. If he has it down by August he will look totally different.
If you believe this stuff go have some fun and look at previous years entries if they stil exist and see how off some of these observations turned out to be.
I agree with Ziff? This can't be good, something must be wrong with the universe today.
I agree that there are red flags to question the objectivity of the person who wrote it. Also, to question the accuracy of some things. I'm not sure taking one piece of info and saying "this is wrong, so we have to throw out the whole post" is necessarily right either. I think thats like saying one poster had one post ever that was wrong so from now on everything he/she says is crap. I think some skepticism is good, but at the same time there is a lot of info in this post. Just have caution while reading and use it as one more piece of information to formulate an idea of what is actually going on.
This is just like pitchers in spring training, people always overreact to a pitcher that gets shelled in a spring training game.
What they never mention is that pitcher may be working on a cut fastball that he's never thrown before, and he threw it 12 times in a row to try and get it down.
Projecting depth charts from spring practice is ridiculous.
this is just one person's viewpoint after a couple of days. In addition, I offer this as it seemed fitting:
Michigan just let in all manner of heathens to observe a couple practices, ping various coaches for information, and take in a Saturday scrimmage; naturally, this has created a ton of internet chatter. Also naturally, large portions of it conflict with other portions of it. There's a faction of super insiders on Rivals declaring Denard Robinson to be a complete disaster and one focused here proclaiming him to be Pat White—except fast! Tate Forcier is either looking like a "walk-on" or the obvious starter, and Devin Gardner is either a total n00b or Vince Young—except fast!
April 13, 2010
Devin and Cox are locks to start...until such time when Denard and Shaw or Toussaint trot out onto the field to start game 1.
Oh yeah, and the compare and contrasts with RR had the feel of backhanded bitch slaps. Yeah, we get it, "15-22", "this isn't Michigan footbaw". Eh, I could've done without that.
biased or not, maybe they are, but they certainly know the game. There was a lot of technical football talk and observations that 90% of us here are fairly clueless about.
I certainly believe and hope Denard is the starter, but it is not out of the realm of possibilities that Devin passes him up due to this being a much better fit for him. Denard is a hard worker and is going to figure this out, but I think Devin has a couple things going for him. He's taller and that allows him to "see the field" better. He is also a more accurate passer. Accuracy is hard to teach but if anyone can do it, I think Denard can. If he does, watch out. But, is it not a nice situation to have an incredible back up? I'll take it.
Could we please just stop this already. The only thing we know about Gardner is that he is taller. That is it. You and everyone else have no fucking idea if he is more accurate. He has played, what, 10 snaps of a actual game time against powerhouse bowling green? Personally I will take the guy who has proven it on the field while breaking NCAA records over the redshirt freshmen any day of the week, no matter what the offense is. Unless we are playing tallest team gets a 20 point head start, ill stick with the guy who got heisman votes last year. I actually think denard will take a step back this year (as he normally would unless he broke his own records), but Christ we haven't seen Gardner play against anything other than walk-ons and players not good enough to crack the starting lineup of one of the worst defenses in the nation.
Long time lurker but I figured its time for a first post here. Just an FYI that a large chunk of this is a word for word ripoff of some Rivals premium content from a few days ago. Wanted to give people a headsup on that in case some people decide to join this site based on this content.
Like I said before, it really would not surprise me if this was completely stolen from other sites and the guy was never at practice but was bored sitting at home this weekend. It wouldn't be the first time GBMWStaff was caught lying about being at practice, Mitch Albom style.
Since he's anonymous, it's impossible for us to verify how much of what he's written is actual observation and how much is not. The fact that you have to be "approved" by the anonymous people there before you can even begin to read their inside accounts strikes me as pretty odd for a free site. Does TomVH personally approve MGoBloggers before he lets them read his recruiting stuff?
Not only do they have to "approve" your account, but they used to ask for your Rivals, Scout, and MGoBlog usernames so they could check up on you. I'm not sure why anyone would actually provide that info but they ask for it.
Then set up a dummy account. Even post occasionally if you need to...and keep your real accounts hidden.
which seems to be what the author is suggesting. Can you imagine Denard trying to pass block? A Percy Harvin-type player who's a slot receiver who runs a lot of reverses, etc., is a reasonable option. But I don't think Denard has all the tools to be a full time RB. Honestly, he's not even close.
As a QB this year I think he'll be fine. Much has already been mentioned about the bias in the article, so I'm not going to beat a dead horse. However, it would not surprise me if Devin were to play as much as Denard by the time we reach teh end of the season.
Maybe the light bulb will go off and Al Borges will move Denard to slot?
IMHE No sugarcoat; Just e-pinion
This was helpful, I guess, but after a while it took on the usual revisionist history crap you see when a transition occurs. Everything the old guy did was wrong, everything the new guy does is better. The old guy didn't care/wasn't passionate enough/was an idiot, and the new guy is the new gold standard who "gets it." RR had his flaws, but I HATE people who say he didn't "respect" UM or that somehow UM is a different beast than most elite college football programs. I love UM to the marrow of my bones, but it is still a school that is trying to produce winners, and RR got that. This just reads like a typical bandwagon jumper who doesn't realize you can like the new guy and still think the old guy wasn't horrible.
I think it would be a massive upset if Denard lost his starting position, and Molk will have to be shot and dumped in the middle of North Dakota before he misses a game at C.
I felt like a parent being told my child isn't perfect (I imagine if I had a child). I felt defensive, before I finally had to concede that maybe MAYBE my child could work on some things.
I do believe DG could be special. The way they talk about him is impressive and reminds me of Brady in the pocket. My freshman year was the Henson/ Brady debate. I liked Brady better because Henson would spook out of the pocket as soon as his first read was gone since he was the (very relative) athletic quarterback, while Brady (probably out of necessity since he was a slow as I can remember) had a knack for making little movements to avoid the rush and find the open reciever. The fact that Devin does this with his speed is a testament to his skill.
Either way, I'd take either of them as my QB over anyone else in the B10. (Bias fully admitted)
the talent... but misses the fact that the best player we have returning is basically getting the rug pulled out from under his feet by Borges. Maybe the best DR can do in this offense is lineup at RB. I wouldn't bet against him accomplishing some wizardry regardless of position given his talent and attitude. A failure for DR to start or succeed in 2011 is not going to fall at the feet of the 2010 B1G Player of the year however. That failure will be be Borges' alone. The cupboard is not bare.
As the French say, "ne panic pas." Borges is not a dope. I doubt he will use him as effectively as RR would have (not because RR is smarter, but because the offensive philosophies are somewhat different), but Borges will not try to make Denard into John Navarre.
I spent the majority of my free time at work today reading this post and then the comments. It was exhausting to wade through so much bias to find the small amounts of information that were trustworthy and useful.
I went to the coaches clinic last year and really enjoyed it but did not attend this year. I wanted to know what the scrimmage was like and how everybody looked. While some of the posters thought it was in bad taste to compare what has went on in the practices under RR, it does shed some light on the atmosphere of the program and the direction of the team now as oppossed to then. Some of his assessments were unfair, almost implying that the team was not having fun last year....I don't think that was accurate. It was not fun losing and never will be....but the first part of the season was dream like until we all woke up. In judging the development of the QB situation he has planted in my mind that Denard will have a very short rope this season and maybe many of us had that in the back of our minds but dare not mention it aloud. It almost seems like the feeling when you hear bad news from the doctor but appreciate his honesty so you know how to deal with it when the symptons really start manifesting itself.
I didn't appreciate the cheap shot he took at Gallon.
First off- Thank you so much for the in depth coverage of what you witnessed! That is so awesome in these dark days of non-sporting events.
The thing I would say is this: I think the coaches see exactly what you're seeing right now, and this is a critical time for learning. Borges seems dedicated to teaching the fundamentals that will be necessary for these QB's to succeed in his ideal scheme and at the next level. Whether the actual playcalling will reflect that next fall remains to be seen. These coaches seem to have incredible experience and knowledge. They aren't going to put these players in a position to fail. If Denard can't throw deep and to the outside with accuracy, I don't expect the final gameplans for next fall to ask him to do much of that. There are throws, I'm sure, that Denard has no problems with, even in the new scheme, and we will see more of those throws.
I guess my point is this: If the new staff were determined to run an offense based on a solid pocket presence and ability to throw a more accurate deep ball to the outside (just a few examples of what you were talking about... certainly not the end all-be all), they would be looking harder at Devin as 'the guy'. I don't think they are going to shove their ideal system down the throat of Denard when it comes time to play in September.
Because of the above hypothesis, I disagree that they should convert Denard to RB... at least for now. We're talking about a guy who threw for 2500 yards last year, not a guy who barely threw the ball at all. There's a Quarterback in Denard Robinson, and while he may be raw in terms of the traditional skillset required to run a pro/west coast offense, give the staff some time to work him up. In the meantime, bet the house that they will tailor some things to his strengths both in the run and pass games. Devin might be more immediately appealing, but at the moment, Denard's earned every right to be 'the guy' at QB.
Wow ... Some of you need to relax ... this was based off one report/practice. We have had a lot of other reports on practices.
First off ... For those people that believe we stole this information from others ... think again ... actually it was our group who gave the information to rivals -- Anison -- to post on their board and also to SteveDeace -- on scout.
Second ... We still attend practices ... if you don't want to believe it -- fine -- doesn't bother me.
Third ... What is funny is people believe Tom Beaver attends practices and he hasn't been to one EVER that wasn't open to the media or the fans.
Take a look at the past couple of weeks of practice reports and then look at other sites -- you will see something interesting -- they read our stuff and post afterwards.
One last thing ... What is funny ... The people making these claims sure do come to our board enough.
Thank You for your time.
I think a lot of the people are ripping on this article because of the numerous jabs taken at the old coaching staff and how they didn't "get it" in one way or another. I thought it was frankly a little gratuitous at times, but I held my tongue until I read this comment. Your blog needs better writing and less anti-RR polemic.
Also, learning to write in complete sentences...you know, without ellipses gluing the clauses together...is kind of standard written English...and it makes you look foolish...when you write...like this...I'm just...saying.
Will keep that in mind. We will take your application anytime.
One last point --- the article that was copied and pasted here from our site was from a poster on our site -- not one of the guys that write for our site. Big Difference (IMO).
I don't believe you.
It's just one practice and we shouldn't read too much into it. Sound advice.