If by "Tate" you mean "Cowbell", then I think the answer is clear: 100%.
repping Frank Murphy. I visited the Murphy house in Harbor Beach years ago. He's a man every Michigander should be proud to call one of their own.
we are most likely in trouble injury or beat down-wise. So I hope your estimate is extremely high.
Iowa game planned against Denard for 2 weeks. And he is still among the leaders in the nation in pass %. Moreover, one of the throws by Tate to Junior was underthrown and into double coverage, requiring the defender to fall down and for Junior to make a play on the ball or else that would have been interception # 3 for Tate. Possibly even more troubling, Tate continues to carry the ball like a loaf of bread and is a turnover waiting to happen unless he cures that very bad habit.
I think things stay the way they are. Rich Rod is a pretty solid guy who is not given to whimsy or flights of fancy. No knock on Tate but RR knows what he has in Denard and will continue to cultivate his monster talent.
Things will not change UNLESS Denard physically can't go.
How many people were bitching about all those throws that Chad Henne chucked up to Braylon against MSU back in 06 that were all, basically, jump balls? Did people say "Oh we should consider that an interception because it was a jump ball"? Junior is taller and more athletic that the other guys back there, give your WR a chance to make a play on the ball and if he can't he's likely to cause enough problems there won't be an interception.
Yes, Tate seems to not carry the ball as close to the vest as he should but sitting around saying the throw to Hemingway was crap and should be considered an interception is ruling out 1 HUGE thing - the talent of WR. Sure, if we had Odoms out there on that one that would have been an absolutely horrid idea but when you've got a guy that's that much taller than the CB you give him a chance - Henne made a living on it and we all talked about how awesome those throws were but when Tate does it he's being wreckless - I don't buy it...
Tate actually referenced Denard's toss to Junior as the reason he lobbed it up for Hemingway in his postgame presser.
That may be, but Denard's pass to Hemingway was a considerably safer throw. All deep passes are not at the same level of riskiness.
Tate's throw was in a game that most everyone had already given up on and it would have taken an 06 MSU-esque style comeback to make it a game vs Denards that was at the end of the game with the game on the line. I'd argue that Denards pass was NOT a safer throw at all - you have to consider more than just what the throw looked like but the game situation. Forcier's situation was dire - we needed points, we needed them now and we were going to have to take some risks to get those points. Denard's situation was we're trying to take the lead in the closing moments of a game that would quite possibly ruin our entire season if we lose it and we had enough time left that we could have just kept on throwing short passes and running the ball and probably have been just fine if we would have taken the safer throws/runs. So, I guess I'll disagree with the idea that Denard's was safer if for no other reason than the worst case potential outcome: Forcier - we lose a game we had all but lost anyway vs Denard - we probably lose a game that we desperately needed to win.
With all that being said, I support the decision to throw on both occasions but that doesn't mean I thought either decision was "safe"...
I think alternating Denard and Tate could make both of them more dangerous. Teams are obviously spending most of their time prepping for Denard. Tate was effective against Iowa because they hadn't prepared for him.
So it would be fun to let Denard have at it first, then switch to Tate and force the defense to adjust. Once they get used to Tate, throw Denard back in. The defense will spend the entire game adjusting rather than playing.
On the other hand, if a defense shows it can't stop Denard, just leave him in and let him tear them up.
This also leads to less first-team reps for each QB during the week, and can disrupt offensive rhythm during a game.
It's really, really hard to make a true 2-QB system work. Florida did it a bit when Tebow was a freshman, but they used him situationally, not as a true 2nd QB (Leak was the starter and got a vast majority of the snaps).
MSU had an experiment with that last season, and it often resulted in a disruption of the offense and everyone appearing uncomfortable (particularly when Nichol was in). Eventually (like 8 or 9 games into the season), the coaching staff gave up and settled on Cousins as the starter and the guy that would get the vast majority of the reps in practice and snaps in-game.
Tate Forcier is a good back-up to have and, at this point, is a more polished passer than Denard Robinson. However, if you're truly looking towards the future, you want to look for "The Guy." Based on athletic ability and upside, Denard Robinson seems to be that person. Forcier is close to as good as he'll ever be, but if Denard can improve his decision-making and touch, the sky's the limit.
I don't think it's a bad idea to have Tate playing, in at least a few drives in late 2nd qrt or 3rd qrt. This can make their half time adjustment more difficult as they don't know who we will send in in the 2nd half. They have very different skill sets and can do different damage to our opponent's defense. If one has a better day, we can stick with him. particularly, i like Hopkins can hook up with Tate and get more reps in those couple of drives.
that a healthy Denard secedes 50% of his snaps to Tate, then you're cork-on-fork retarded. 30% is still insane, and I thank God every day that these kinds of people never have a position of responsibility anywhere near a football team.
Denard is your quarterback. And he's really, really fucking good. Deal with it.
This is definitely the sentiment that I agree with. If Denard is 100%, Tate does not see the field. Tate does not offer us the 2-dimensional play that Denard offers us on every single play. Honestly the only reason Tate has gotten in this year is because Denard wasn't 100% and that's really the only reason.
This bye week is going to be a tremendous help for this team. With everyone getting close to 100% by Penn State, we are going to come out firing on all cylinders.
To be fair, it's not like Tate is a statue back there - the guy was effective running the offense last year both through the air and on his feet. I think it is clear that Denard is the far better rusher but Tate is perhaps a bit more polished a passer, though obviously Denard will be able to make more inroads as a passer than Tate suddenly hooking up to ridiculum and becoming faster. Right now, the QB who can best lead this team to a victory in the given situation should play, and I don't think either player should "expect" to have the starting position. Sure, continuity would be great, but as of right now I think the coaching staff needs to win games now and worry about egos later.
Oklahoma! Oklahoma! Oklahoma!
When I posed the second part of the question, "What % and WHY?" I really appreciate your insight to the why part. "Because he is our f@#$$#$ qb." Great analysis. Thanks.
How about "Rich Rodriguez. Coach. Head. Michigan, University of. Ann Arbor. says he's your fucking QB" does that quench your insatiable appetite to obtain completely arbitary percentage numbers?
And BTW, when a post is prefaced with "it's a bye week, let's be future know it alls" it is setting a fun tone of practically pointless speculation (though I did offer some analysis to my well prefaced future speculation). God bless and Go Blue.
I understand your sentiments, but act like a michigan man, not an angry Domer.
If you want people to not do something it's usually more helpful to tell them how to fix the problem than it is to yell "you fucked up!"
Not sure why you'd be negged for asking someone to be more respectful. Which probably means I'll be negged too.... :P
Why did you switch around head coach? And then list Michigan as if it were somebody's name?
I do not think that word means what you think it means...
I don't think the plan will change much at all from before the season. Denard will be the starter, and Tate only used if there's an injury to Denard, Denard plays poorly enough that we need a change of pace, or the game is completely out of hand in our favor. We haven't really had the 2nd option come up yet, and I hope it doesn't happen. I think Tate's performance against Iowa will give Rich the confidence to use Tate should that situation arise, at least.
"Denard plays poorly enough that we need a change of pace" & "We haven't really had the 2nd option come up yet" - were you watching the MSU game? It was ugly and, even the most ardent Denard supporter knows that Tate is a better passer. Not a better total package but when you're down big and your only hope is to throw the ball it doesn't make any sense to leave your best passer (who has tons of experience and tons of big game/tight situation experience) sit on the bench. Do we totally forget what Tate did in the 4th quarter against MSU last year? Denard really wasn't doing a damn thing against MSU and when it got to the point that it was plainly obviously to everyone it just wasn't working that day Tate should have come in. MSU should have been like last years Iowa game - Denard just didn't have it that day so you sit him, let him get his wits about him, and put Tate in to see if he can do anything. RR is always talking about having 3 QBs good enough to win with, well, put your money where your mouth is and rather than watch the game completely go to shit give one of them a shot. I'm not saying Denard shouldn't be the starter but he should have the same leash that Tate had last year - when it's obvious the kid is having an off day you shouldn't feel bad about putting in the backup...
I definitely think we'll see more of Forcier. Yes, Denard is our starter, and has ridiculous ability, but you have to love tate's crisp passing, particularly on those slants to JR and Stonum. Being able to hit those is both frustrating to the defense and confidence boosting to the offense. Denard has made some great throws into tight coverage, but I'm pretty sure defenses from here on out will do everything they can to force michigan into passing situations while Denard's in there. Iowa probably was ecstatic about holding Robinson to what, 5 or so yards per carry?
I see no problem getting both QB's involved. You can point to Tate's 2 interceptions, but quite frankly, his energy and desire to try to make plays was the only thing really keeping us alive against Iowa.
I can't believe i'm saying this, because it's so rare from a speedster like Denard, but he's got to learn to take off on the pass plays and kill the D. once he learns how to do that, how can you contain the guy?
his energy and desire to try to make plays was the only thing really keeping us alive against Iowa.
Er, no. Our playbook kept us alive. And it always will, provided we dont fumble or throw picks in the redzone. Both our quarterbacks can do this - and only one of them has otherworldly ability to run the ball too. Pretty sweet combo, right? Did you know he LEADS THE FUCKING NATION IN RUSHING YARDS?
In an earlier post on the board with the SI interview of RR, he stated that Denard is the QB of this team. When listening to the interview RR seems very confident in Denard's ability and does not seem to be even looking at platooning the QB position.
Hard to argue with the coach. His staunch support says something, and that makes my original % guesses too high. I guess my more pessimistic side thinks Denard's Iowa and MSU performance is not an aberration and thus Tate gets up to around 50% by the last two games. Let's hope Denard is healthy and can bounce back from a bad 6 quarters.
I would like to see Forcier get in for at least three drives, somewhere in the first three quarters. I want opposing defenses to have to prepare harder, work harder, and think harder than they normally would. That can cause a total breakdown in the fourth quarter: first mentally, then physically.
But, of course, no matter what we speculate, we won't really know until it happens on the field.
Look, I know Tate's polished as a passer and we'd like to give him the upper hand in that regard - but the reality is the numbers are just about equal, if not in Denard's favor. Sure, he makes some bad throws - but so does Tate, so why so much give for Tate here? Their passing capabilities are not appreciably different.
Meanwhile, Denard is like the fastest fucking dude in the universe.
So, tell me. Please tell me. How the fuck do coaches gameplan any harder if we have a second, more limited QB entering the game? The fucking playcalls aren't gonna be any different on our end. But we sure as shit will be a lot easier to stop running the ball. So, really, all that shit about making teams work harder is utter rubbish and just formulated by you to justify the use of a more limited QB who just so happens to impress you in games that are mostly out of reach.
Because of the one thing that Tate has shown that Denard hasn't: a remarkable ability to pass on the run. While their passing numbers are about equal, the situations that they got those numbers in have been very different.
Denard can run when the game's on the line. But we've also seen him struggle to pass under pressure. Tate can scramble out of the pocket under pressure, and still get the ball off. Does that mean Tate is the better quarterback? Not at all. But it could mean he's better under certain situations.
When the opposing defense is able to apply pressure and contain the run, and the team is down a couple scores near the end of the game, so that passing becomes more critical, then why not go with Tate for a bit. Especially if Denard is struggling.
You make it sound like their skill sets are the same, Denard's just better in every way. Not true.
Also, it was a legitimate topic. With due respect, your attitude isn't justified. We're a message board, for fans of the team to enjoy themselves. What's decided here doesn't matter: it won't affect who's played next week, or even public perception at large. So, chill. Have fun. Respect others.
How will defenses have to prepare, think harder because of Tate? Denard is so tough to defend because of his insane running ability. 2 weeks ago he was the Heisman front runner and now we want to take away snaps from him? I think teams would much rather have Tate play.
Denard starting for his big play ability in both aspects. Tate coming in if we are behind and have to throw to catch up and Denard coming back in (or staying in) if we need to milk the clock. Also Tate has shown the ability to come off the bench and will not take it as a slight. I want both in the backfield as well especially in a close game as that would be indefensible.
I don't get it. Rodriguez has already said Denard is the starter and the team wants him to start. Denard is the leader of the offense and can do more than Tate in the game. I know Tate is a better passer right now, but what has Denard done for him to have snaps taken away?
Yeah, I want Michigan to reduce the playing time of the most exciting player in college football, who also is the nation's leading rusher, and who completed over 65% of his passes against 2 of the best defenses in the nation the past two weeks, so we can put a QB on the field whom his teammates and head coach publicly berated for his lack of commitment and preparation this past summer.
That sounds like a brilliant fucking idea.
I think we will see a lot of Tate. Odds are when we are up by 42 points going into the 3rd quarter that he will get a lot of play time.
Unless he gets hurt, throws a shoe or spontaneously combusts. Otherwise, unless we have a big lead or the game is out of reach, the more talented player and respected leader needs to play.
I can't see it. Denard is the starter. As long as he's healthy and performing, he'll be at QB. The bye week gives him a chance to get over some of his bumps and bruises.
Tate and Denard have opposite problems. Denard plays completely within the offense. He very rarely scrambles on passing plays and seems to make the vast majority of his contribution within the design of the offense. I wish he'd scramble more, especially when the opposition plays man.
Tate can't play within the offense to save his life. He reminds me of my high school team's QB way back when I was in my Senior year. Dude was a pretty good athlete, played hard, and tried to "make a play" on every single play. He liked to run around a lot and forced a lot of bad passes. Tate is a much more talented version of him. When he's on, he's on, but he can't let the game come to him and forces a lot of throws. He threw two picks (one was obviously an end of game throw that happens when yardage has to happen) and should have had another on that duck Hemingway snagged near the end zone.
Just my thoughts, I a lot of folks like Tate, but I'm terrified when he plays.
Interesting thoughts, especially when you take your comments and apply them- Tate vs. O-state against Denard vs. Sparty this year. I'd take Denard's performance over Tate's. Thus less of a platoon % for Tate.
Watch the last pick again. He didn't run around because he liked to, he ran because Dorrestein whiffed on his block and Iowa got pressure on Tate with a 3 man rush.
People think Tate just "wants to scramble" but I don't agree. IMO it's usually because he's running for his life.
If anyone would be a great scrambler, you'd think it would be Denard. With his speed he could easily pick up big yards if he doesn't see an open guy.
The last pick was totally understandable. He basically had to force a throw in a difficult situation.
It's not that he scrambles a lot, it's that he tries to make a big play every play instead of playing within the system. The first pick was terrible, and the cross-field bomb to Hemingway was a really bad idea--even though it worked.
Until he settles down some, I won't be comfortable with him in the game. Obviously he was the best choice last year and had to play in a really difficult situation, but after twelve starts, he's got to let the game happen or it's going to keep resulting in several disastrous plays each time he sees significant action.
People think Tate just "wants to scramble" but I don't agree. IMO it's usually because he's running for his life.
If you watch him, he seems to instinctively leave the pocket if his first option is covered, regardless of whether or not he's seriously pressured. I wouldn't be surprised if that was something his HS coach drilled into his head. At that level, it probably made perfect sense, but here it frequently gets him into trouble. That's when almost all of his INTs occur. He's got to learn to trust his proctection and step up in the pocket instead of bailing.
will just never accept Denard as our QB. They will grudgingly allow him to play as long as he is putting up NCAA record type numbers, but the moment he shows the slightest of weakness while playing injured they want him out.
And yet, somehow I know these same people wouldn't want to put in Denard as a change of pace if it was Tate that was putting the numbers Denard has been this season.
"I'd love to see Denard return to September form"
So would I but unfortunately we don't play Indiana or Bowling Green again this season. We're in the heart of the B10 season and the defenses we're facing are going to be much tougher, plain and simple.
And no, RR is right on this - Denard needs to be the guy. His reading pass defense skills are perhaps not yet as polished as Tate's, but they won't get better if he doesn't play in passing situations.
Once Denard is comfortable in the pocket throwing as he is running the various read/option plays - look out. He'll be unstoppable.
Only weakens the offense. Repetiiton is everything. You have an established starter (Denard) and a great, yes I said great, back up (Tate). You stick to that.
With Denard, the offense is more complete because he dictates to the defense how they defend us. With Tate, the defense is able to dictate to us how to play. A subtle difference, but in reality is a huge difference.
Do people not understand that Denard is the 16th rated passer in the country? I mean really, this is all getting a little ridiculous. And, oh yea, the leading rusher in the country as well. He's becoming a victim of his early success here. Yes, Tate moved the ball pretty well against Iowa's defense. But how is that much different from what happened last year? He still doesn't have great pocket presence in the face of pressure and scrambles too much. That's already something Denard has him beat on (see: last drive completion to Hemingway vs. Indiana).
Denard is quite simply perfect QB for this offense. Does he miss on deep balls regularly? Yes. Does he also have to potential to improve on that greatly with reps? Absolutely. He's a sophomore and will only get better with playing time. Denard is the pilot of this offense. He makes it go. There may be a few growing pains in his progression...in areas Tate is better at quite frankly. But this team is not winning a national title this year. They'll probably win 8 and with Denard playing every game (the whole game if healthy) and growing, that number will probably increase next year.
You hit on a real key here. When Tate is not making poor decisions, he is a more polished passer, particularly on the deep throws, than Denard. However, think where Denard is now versus this time last year. When he develops the touch on the longer throws, which he will with time, he will be even scarier to opposing defenses. I don't think he is quite yet perfect, only because he is erratic on long throws. But I completely agree with you....you have to keep giving him reps so that he can become unbelievable in the next two years. I am a huge Tate fan, but Denard's upside is greater. RR knows what he's doing here.
It's been quite obvious that RR is all about winning this year and not just building for the future (i.e. burning DG's redshirt). Tate is a better passer today, you do what you can do with that you have today and you worry about tomorrow, tomorrow. I don't necessarily think that's a good idea but it's qutie obvious that's the standpoint of the coaching staff so it boggles the mind that they'd let games get out of hand just so Denard can get some more reps in the game in passing situations - just doesn't make any sense to me... When we're down to the point where our only hope is passing and/or the O hasn't really done sh!t with Denard in I think it's time for Tate. It has nothing to do with who's better and everything to do with "How can we win this game."
Just to make my point clear - Denard is the starter but I don't think we should ride him until the game is so far out of reach that it wouldn't matter if Tom Brady came in in relief...
But how do we reconcile his last 6 quarters of football? As I have said in previous comments and for some reason got negged for, hopefully they were an exception to his body of work for the year. If not, we have to platoon Tate at least a bit. This thread does not question if Denard should start, or if he is the most electric player in the country. It does question Tate's success against Iowa with Denard's recent struggles, and if that should afford Tate a % of snaps moving forward. Based on the replies a growing minority believe Tate should be platooned a bit.
I reconcile those last 2 games by saying those were the best 2 defenses he's played so far..phenomenal defenses at that. Yet he still was moving the ball up the field consistently on them. He did make a couple mistakes that cut short a couple drives, but he had some help in that regard. Those mistakes, while painful, are valuable teaching experiences that can't be replaced.
Look, I think Tate is a great talent who is absolutely valuable to this team. No question about it. I also think you have to think long-term when making a decision about your program's starting quarterback when you have two sophomores. Denard will return to being who he was the first 5 games over the next 3 games. Let's remember he only had 2 turnovers those first 5 games, and frankly Tate doesn't take care of the ball like that. The things Tate does well Denard can do to PSU, Purdue and Illinois. He is also the biggest hope of making this team an unstoppable force the next 2 years. He can carry us now and in doing that be better prepared to do that in the future.
To put it simply, I think Tate is a more than capable player. I think we could win 2, maybe 3 more games with him at the helm in some extended capacity. HOWEVA, Denard is undeniably the QB1 (not suggesting that you're disputing this fact, OP), and until he can't do the things that make him the superior quarterback, he is the guy who we will win or lose with. With that said, I wouldn't mind seeing some platooning, but I can only really determine the appropriate extent of said 2-QB system until we go to Happy Valley. If Denard is as up to the challenge as I think he is, then this is, essentially, a moot point.
because Denard will continue to be periodically banged up. This isn't because DR is fragile or because he's not a dropback QB, but only because he's handling the ball quite a bit and it's a contact sport. It's very difficult to avoid getting hurt regardless of what position you're playing, especially if you're the focus of the defense.
I don't expect DR to lose his starting role for any reason other than injury.
Barring injury, I only see Tate coming in if Denard is having a very poor day - not likely. Good to know we have a decent backup behind him though. Compare the duo to Threet & Sheridan is like Kate Beckinsale vs. Rosie O'Donnell. Only one gives you a chance to even perform.
I think Denard goes bat-shit crazy on the ground against Penn State. It's a tough year in Unhappy Valley, and the D isn't up to normal PSU standards. This game provides a chance for the team to get some confidence back, and that's important IMO.
of snaps. I never believed it was wise to put him on the bench in the first place and believed it was an irresponsible move on RR's part from the jump. Tate is the best quarterback on our roster and our best bet against competent Big Ten opponents. I want Tate to start, I think that Denard would be a good change of pace to keep defenses guessing. If we want wins, join in prayer that RR sees the light while a glimmer remains.
I hope he doesn't see a lot of snaps. I believed it was wise to make tate the back up it was a responsible move on RR's part from the jump. Denard is the best quarterback on our roster and our best bet against competent Big Ten opponents. I want Denard to start, I think Tate would be a good change of pace to keep defenses guessing. If we want wins, join in prayer that RR sees the light and not listen to Ijohnb.
5, huh. And you speak regarding responsibility? You are a USC fan wearing a Reggie Bush t-shirt. Go away.
WTF... I'm as big a michigan fan as you. You think you're better than me because you have more points on a blog. I disagree with you on thinking Tate should be the starter but what do I know I'm a usc fan wearing a reggie bush t-shirt
Fab 5, huh. And you speak regarding responsibility? You are a USC fan wearing a Reggie Bush t-shirt. Go away.
I actually think that Denard is over-achieving. No doubt that Denard has the running ability and some throwing ability to move the chains. However, eventually as time passes, I think he will settle back down to his actual talent level. We may already be seeing it.
Please explain to me what Denard has done for you not to want him to be the starter? I want a honest answer from the people who believe he shouldn't be the starter. Tell me what really bothers you about Denard be honest people lets be real.
and simply put, super-cool, but he has a limited skill set. While the Big Ten has been the subject of criticism for the last few years for various reasons, your typical Big Ten defense is big, physical, and fast. Denard is fantastic in the open field, but he is not going to be able to consistently get into the open field against good Big Ten defenses. If you were frustrated watching MSU and Iowa games, you better polish up your patience for the rest of the schedule. RR can have his way with UConn and Bowling Green. Big Ten teams are going to eat this up. There is no ulterior motive in my critique of Denard Robinson. He looks to be an outstanding kid with a huge upside somewhere on the field. I just feel that Big Ten quarterback is the worst hand you could deal the kid.
You do understand Denard has only started seven games. What do you mean limited skill set you are losing me.
You must be kidding. Look at where Denard was last season. He could barely complete passes against Delaware State. Now look where he is now. That is not what I would call a limited skill set. I would call that growth. Since he is a sophomore, I would think that progression will continue as he gets more experience.
Denard also had 18 carries for 105 yards (5.8 YPC) against Iowa...in a half of play...as the QB. Is that not moving the ball? Will he break off 70 yard runs against the big boys? Probably not. But he is still keeping the offense going. He moved the ball against MSU also but made key mistakes. Guess what? Ricky Stanzi was an interception machine last season as a Junior and look where he is now. Comments like this convince me that he is a victim of his early success. Denard is the real deal.
Somewhere in this thread was a post about those that will never support Denard, you my friend are obviously one of them. I went back and read some of your posts from 4-5 weeks ago, and you had nothing good to say about him then. While I credit you from sticking to your guns, this debate is obviously a lost cause with you.
I was enjoying the ride, all the while believing that a hard dose of reality was in store once conference play began. I don't dislike Denard Robinson, I think he is fantastic. I just don't think he is being put in a position for long-term success, both as part of this team and individually. Denard Robinson's future is as Devin Hester, Tedd Ginn Jr., Percy Harvin.
I really like Denard, I just think Tate is a better quarterback and better suited to succeed at quarterback in this conference.
I know Coach Rod is rolling with Denard, so I hope I an wrong.
Here's a hard dose of reality. 13/18 for 96 yards, 1 int, 1 td. 18 carries, 105 yards. Against one of the best defenses in the country, let alone the big ten. In roughly half a game.
However, eventually as time passes, I think he will settle back down to his actual talent level.
He and Vince Young are the only players in history to record two 200/200 games. You really think that was some random fluke and his "actual talent level" is far beneath that?
I think we need to at least keep in mind that while Denard is breaking/setting all these records (just as Colt Brennan shattered a bunch of records) that Denard was forced to get those kinds of numbers because 1) our D sucks and 2) our special teams aren't special. Before people get all pissed off - Denard is an exceptional QB with great skill and he's going to, hopefully, lead us back to prominance but let's look at Vince Young's UT team. There were a number of games that VY could have quite easily picked up 200/200 but he played on a team with an absolutely absurd defense so he didn't have to so he either 1) just started handing it off more or 2) actually came out of the game. I'm not willing to say that Denard is better than VY by any stretch of the imagination just because he tied one of his records - he has a long way to go and a lot of games to win but I think at least a fair chunk of his numbers are a direct result of 1) designed QB keepers and 2) our D sucking. I'd bet if Pryor came here instead of OSU he'd have shattered VY's record for 200/200 games as RR would be using his skill set to it's full potential.
Yeah, I'll bet I could do it too because our d sucks and they'd keep giving me the ball.
back. I wish he hadn't gotten hurt last game.
The team will break through by the end of the year, and we're going bowling.
Maybe you should contact Jim Leyland regarding your idea. Maybe Miguel Cabrera should platoon with a AAA level lefty at first base to give the opposing teams something else to game plan