DRob couldn't have picked a better game to have the performance that he did. Here's to hoping that he matured this weekend, and we'll be seeing a lot more games like that from him next year.
Pretty good for a QB that some said should be benched
I mean really... he's DENARD!
I'm just reminded of the guy on the liveblog who wanted him out after the first half. The kid was 7/8 with >100 yards and 1TD, plus he had two rushing TD's and was averaging more than 6YPC.
Some people in life appear to be willfully, intentionally, assertively stupid. They're the ones who end up pepper spraying fellow shoppers in Wal-Mart.
Or the guy who said Hoke would be fired if he lost the game.
IMO, Denard reached another level during this game and I don't think he'll look back. At some point in the second half I stopped thinking "Don't throw an int!!" on passing downs and looked forward to the results.
The UFR will answer this but wasn't Borges' call playing a lot more restricted to Denard's strengths vs earlier games?
Couldn't agree more. It seemed that Borges was really playing to his strengths Saturday. But Denard was also playing out of his mind. He was making all the correct decisions and his throws were far more accurate then we have seen out of him. His throw to Koger for a first down was one of his best throws in his career in my opinion. e put just enough touch on it to loft it over a Ohio backer and in front of the Safty. They had absolutely no way to defend a pass like that. He was very fun to watch Saturday. Not only was he passing great but he was also running tougher then he ever has.
Borges obviously worked to establish Denard more as a runner in this game, but as far as the passing game went, I don't know if the playcalling was that different than before. Denard just played really, really well. A few of his throws were into pretty tight coverage (particularly the TDs to Hemingway and Odoms and the long pass to Dileo) but he put it exactly where it needed to be.
The Denard of the past few weeks is hardly the same guy who played against MSU (when people wante him benched). People expected this kind of improvement over the offseason, but a transition to Borges' coaching temporarily held him back. I think it has finally clicked for him (just look at his perfect footwork in the OSU game compared to earlier in the year), and he should be fantastic next year.
I'll admit that I was one who thought the team might be better with Denard playing more of a Percy Harvin role and Devin playing QB. Most people arguing for Devin at QB did not want Denard "benched". So I don't think that word is accurate. Credit to Denard for improving when I thought he was stagnating. I never stopped rooting for him, just questioning if he had reached his ceiling as a passer. I'm not holding my breath when he passes anymore.
Didn't make a bad decision in the passing game all day, as far as I can recall, and his throws were all on the money -- usually you have at least one or two passes a game w/Denard where someone like Hemingway or Koger bails him out with a circus catch on a poorly placed throw, but not this time. His decision-making regarding when to scramble and when to stay in the pocket and go through his progressions was also terrific -- just watch the TD pass to Hemingway again, for example.
Can't wait to see what Denard can do with another off-season in this offense under his belt, and as Borges continues to learn what works and what doesn't with the current personnel.
You can put my idiot brother into the bench Denard camp - or at least he was there until the Nebraska game. He spent much of the pre-game tailgate explaining in great detail to all of us why Denard was nothing more than a slot receiver and the best use of him would be on jet sweeps and double passes from Devon. Needless-to-say I told him he was completely full of shit and just demonstrated his absolute lack of any football knowledge.
And for the past two post-game tailgates I've had great fun reminding him of what a good "slot receiver" we have at QB. As a matter of fact our slot receiver just did something that the great Chad Henne could never do - he beat Ohio State!
Unfortunately, QB's with "too much" skin pigmentation get criticized more. The darker the skin and the more "hip hop" the appearance, the less mainstream America trusts a player to be a QB. What really angers me about this is that Denard is emerging as one of the finest role models in college football, both on and off the field, but he still has critics in his school's home town.
Denard doesn't get into trouble, he praises God after every touchdown instead of himself, he deflects compliments in pressers and redircects them to his teammates and coaches, and he never has anything bad to say about anyone. There are no "incidents" at bars, frat beatdowns, or vehicles beyond his means. There are no drug or alcohol convictions.
Also, don't forget that if Denard had left in January, a lot of people would have followed him. Instead, he not only stayed, but asked everyone else to stay. He "bought into" and learned an offense that doesn't totally fit his skills, and pretty much guarantees that he won't win a Heisman. He worked hard over the summer with receivers. He has learned footwork on the fly, as the year has gone by.
He rushed for 1117 yards this season and passed for 1958. His TD/Int ratio was 18/14, and his rating was 142.8. His rating against Nebraska was 170.7 and it was 223.1 against Ohio. Other than selling popcorn at halftime to get extra revenue for the athletic department, I really don't know what more anyone can ask of him.
I hope your "idiot brother" reads this thread.
Looks like he must've cause I can't see any other possible reason why you'd get down voted. Everything you wrote is 100% correct IMO.
of his idiotic first few lines that have nothing to do with why Denard was being criticized earlier in the season.
How does your brain even concoct such a ridiculous notion?
I stood by Denard all season but to say that people thought he should be benched because he is black is so boldly dumb it defies reason. I'm guessing that it had WAY more to do with his 50% completion rate and his tendency to throw dumb picks than the fact that he had dreadlocks.
Do stereotypes and racism exist in some circles? Yes. And they always will because there will always be people whose minds work in ways that defy reason . But 99% of the time when someone brings up race as an excuse for something - especially today - it is dead wrong. And my friend, you are definitely in the 99% on this one.
How can people on this board who were concerned enough about the success of the UM football team, and the struggles that team was having with it's passing game, during a crucial stretch of the season be considered racists for wanting the starting QB moved to a position suited to his talents and replaced by QB of the same skin color?
He was illustrating how dumb people were being about wanting to replace Denard at QB by making an equally dumb assertion about why people wanted to replace Denard. You have to appreciate the sophistication of his use of irony -- that's what separates us from MLive, you see.
giving too much credit to tater's comments. I agree with everything else he said about Drob except for what he said in the first paragraph. Whether people think it was dumb to consider replacing Drob with DG or not is of personal opinion. I have to admit I was begining to get worried during that middle stretch of the season. Not all of that was on Drob some of it was Borges. But there were many out there, including former coaches and players, questioning the choice of Drob under center. Heck even Hoke was giving DG more playing time. Some due to play calling, some due to injury but in a couple instances Drob could have returned but didn't. There were legitimate concerns.
it is truly remarkable how well Denard played. I didn't realize it at the time, as I was so stressed out just wanting us to win, but he played probably his best game in his biggest game. And the best part was that he showed a ton of improvement. Kudos as well to Borges who rightly recieved criticism after the MSU and Iowa games.
Borges and Denard really seem to have adapted well to each other. Lets hope they keep it going.
Anyone who ever said that Denard should be benched should be punched in the face. I don't hate all of you people, everyone makes mistakes, but damn dude why would you want to put that man on the bench.
I propose dillon fail, you'd only have to change one letter.
I'm pretty sure he's serious Bouje, lets murderize him. I'll get him from the front you get him from the back. ON the count of 3, 1.......2.......3
Of course I reapect your opinion. Dude go smoke a bowl or something. Just take a deep breath. It's gonna be okay.
No i have no idea what football is, care to explain it to me? What's with the attacks? I'm pretty sure I made some jokes but I never once made any kind of attack on you. Quit being a dick.
Denard is/was the leader of this team. No, I don't bench him at any point during a season in which 7 wins was a reasonable expectation. I'm not as reactionary as some, I guess.
I am so glad I wasn't apart of the herd, woe-is-us fanbase that thought a team returning 18-19 starters, facing a weak schedule and vastly improving their DC position would only go 7-5 before the season started.
10-2, 9-3 was the pick from the start for anyone who actually looked at the team we had assembled.
nobody with half a brain regarding Michigan football wanted DG to start over DR. Even with his struggles he was still the best option we had at QB and DG proved that many times with some epic derp moments. New coaching staff trying to implement a new system means just about any QB would struggle with all the new wrinkles added to the playbook.
There are well over 100 Michigan football players and coaches who would laugh their asses off at that assertion.
Don't laugh at Denard, he'll smile you to death.
Learn how to think
Learn how to spell
As you have aptly shown today.
Unless, of course, you're Denard.
That's the thing, though. There wasn't a backup QB ready to go. So, no, I never wanted him benched. If Devin Gardner could do more than try to scramble like Denard and fail, with the occasional nice pass, I would have been all for him. But every time Devin was in this season, I was cringing. Especially in the Iowa game.
I wanted Michigan to stop running an offense apparently designed to play to his weaknesses. It's absolutely no coincidence at all that he's played 6 billion times better since Michigan started running the spread as their base set.
Do you think there's any connection between Denard getting better and being kept in as the starter?
But dont try to pretend for one second that everyone of you at one point or another didn't want hom [sic] benched...
Not me. Don't pin that one on me. I never wanted Denard benched. I saw what a Chinese Fire Drill the offense could be under Devin. I fear that we might have had 3 or 4 delay penalties every game if Devin had been put in.
I just love how this 40-34 (in regulation) game was so historic and such a 'return to Michigan football,' while our 2010 win over Illinois which was 45-45 in regulation was such a disgraceful track meet that some suggested that we needed to fire our then-Head Coach. By rights, with a few more completions and a good call or two, last Saturday's OSU game could have finished at 44-44 in regulation.
is not Ohio State. In addition, the defense did not close out that game (unlike in The Game) and the final score reached the 60s. Giving up 60+ to The Zooker is indeed an embarrassment.
Regardless of the down year that OSU is having, their team is far superior to Illinois last year or this (finishing season 0-6).
In addition, this game could be seen as an aberration with an otherwise solid season-long defensive effort. The same is absolutely not true of last year, which was a season-long trainwreck of stuffed animals and 3-man rushes giving up 30 yard plays.
The simple fact was that the '10 Illinois game was 45-all at the end of regulation and this game could easily have been 44-all at the end of regulation.
I'm not complaining about anything other than that there is such a stark difference in the popular and media perceptions, with the last two Michigan Head Football coaches.
The 2011 Michigan team is two throws away from being 8-4 with losses to all three of its biggest rivals. One great catch by Roy Roundtree against Notre Dame, and one overthrown incompletion to a TD-bound Devier Posey.
well if you're gonna play the what if game the 2010 team was a few plays away from being 4-8. they were one overthrown bomb away from losing to nd. one underthrown hail mary from indiana tying it and one defensive stop away from losing to 1aa umass. things happen during the season and games swing both ways on close plays. i know you liked coach rodriguez and i did too but this post just looks like you're almost disappointed that michigan didn't go 8-4 so it wouldn't look like such a turn around.
Not disappointed. Coach Rodriguez predicted 9 or 10 wins for this team and he was exactly right. I am not playing any what if games. I see an improved Michigan team, with a vastly improved defense, and (early, and in the two losses) a sometimes very frustrating offense.
If you are asking, my impression is that I see an "improved" Michigan team, not a miraculously rejuvenated Michigan team.
But even that wasn't my original point. My original point about the Illinois score is what a media turnaround this all seems to be.
The 2011 Michigan team is two throws away from being 8-4 with losses to all three of its biggest rivals. One great catch by Roy Roundtree against Notre Dame, and one overthrown incompletion to a TD-bound Devier Posey.
10-2 is 10-2. The media perception of a 10-2 team will always be drastically different than that of a 7-5 team, regardless of coach, regardless of how that 10-2 record supposedly came to be (Your argument about this is a lame duck. Any two plays can change the course of any season. That's football). Also, a B1G record of 6-2, as opposed to a B1G record of 3-5 will change that perception as well, as will tangible improvement in at least two major facets of the game - defense and special teams.
Finally, the perpcetion about Michigan football changes because it beat its arch rival - a rival that has dominated The Game as of late - and even if the score was 101-100 that perception is still going to change, and with good reason too. It's amazing how you try to downplay this huge win due to your ongoing and forced narrative.
You can't seriously be downplaying the significance of beating OSU for the first time in 7 years can you?
What I am saying is that it is exquisitely hypocritical, for all of the people who complained about our "basketball score" win over Illinois to now say that we are finally back to Michigan football.
(I was quite satisfied with the win over OSU. But I would have been ecstatic, if Posey had caught that long ball, scored for 6, OSU had gone for 2 and failed, and Michigan had gone on to a 67-65 3OT win. That would have been the sweetest win of all.)
It is what you're doing.
Any type of win over OSU is "Michigan football".
It's much different than beating Illinois.
Does anybody suppose, that the "make Denard a slot reciever" campaign was tinged with more of the same bury-Rodriguez emotion of the past ten months?
It is not an allegation that I'd lay at the steps of the current staff -- far from it, Hoke has stood behind Denard 110%. Just as Hoke has been quite gracious to Rodriguez.
But clearly, it seemed to be the same mouth-breathers in the newspapers, on the radio, and on the 'net, who were trying so hard to get Rodriguez fired a year ago, and who in 2011 figured that Michigan had to get going with some sort of West Coast offense, putting Devin under center and Denard someplace else. I got the impression that it was a "scheme" argument, and not so much a personal attack on Denard. All equally offensive to me, but whatever...
If Michigan had a harder time beating Ohio.
But very telling.
agree that you're wrong about something...you know you've gone off the deep-end.
I've completely agreed with most of your posts today, but in particular on this thread your counter-reasoning to Tater's, uh, assertion.
Don't know if you should be afraid of that or not....but it's not just this one.
the further we get from 2008-10, the more we will agree!
I wouldn't have been happier if Michigan had had a "harder" time beating OSU, and that isn't what I said.
What I said, and what I meant, is that I'd have been delighted if Michigan had beaten OSU by the same "basketball" score by which Rodriguez's Michigan team beat Illinois (and was criticized for it!) And it is funny how close we got to that result.
It isn't that I am in any way disloyal to Michigan. It is that I am still loving any chance to twist the knife in people who were themselves disloyal to Michigan over the previous three years.
Let’s be fair here, we dared OSU to beat us through the air and they could not. End of argument! We knew BM was not very accurate as demonstrated in previous games, but he is a dangerous runner. As I recall OSU has the 3rd worst passing attack in the FBS. BM has hit some long passes in some games (a few last Saturday), but has a number of games where he was awful in throwing the ball. When we start dissecting facts by saying" woulda", "coulda", "shoulda", maybe, "ifa", then we also have to look at the plays that would have given us a couple more scores. A tackle here or there, or an interception here or there, or a fumble going differently, or a call going differently would surely have affected the score - one way or the other. During a twelve game season there is a high probability of a few above average scores against us - which actually happened. In this case the offense bailed us out by putting up more points on the board. I think OSU played above their heads and I applaud them for it. But we won the frickin' game! I'm not spending a millisecond going over this game to see how we could have lost it. I repeat - we won the frickin' game! If you are an OSU fan then hate it, but if you are a Michigan then love it! It’s called a rivalry game because the dominate team does not always win - many times the underdog pulls an upset (1969, 199x). In this game the dominate team won by fending off the upset minded underdog. We all saw that Denard played brilliantly, but he doesn't want us to focus on him, so I say thanks team - Coach Hoke - Coach Borges - Coach Mattison for easing a decade of pain.
It was a pretty windy day. Not Trash Tornado windy, of course,but certainly breezy.
Helluva game, kid.
Yeah, I think we get that wind is wind.
As for Cousins, that game was his worst completion percentage game of the year, so I think he was hindered a bit as well (54%).
Wind is wind. I'm gonna steal that for the future.
I think you meant Vincent Smith there...
The iPhone allows it.
This season, Cousins averaged 228 yards per game, 8 yards per attempt, and a 64% pass completion.
Compare that to the above stats for the game against us (which are factored into his per game average).
Facts......... use them.
I also remember comments about a certain Mr. JT Floyd that some/many on this here blog said would be a 6th string DB by the middle of the season, and that he was just terrible/lost, and that he wouldn't get his fifth year. Yet he had the best year of any corner on the squad.
Good job, Denard. Good job, JT.
Ummm...hooray, J.T. Floyd. You succeeded in not falling all the way to 6th on the depth chart!
Seriously, though, I don't remember anyone saying that he wouldn't get a fifth year. But the guy got burned against Nebraska and got burned multiple times against Ohio State. He had a solid game against Illinois, and somehow that seems to have made you forget about everything else. He's still just mediocre.
He's much better than mediocre. He's the shit. He's lock down. He tackles like a freight train, and covers like a freshly washed blanket. And I do distinctly remember his name often coming up in discussions about the fifth year renewals during the Great Scholarship Crunch of 2011. Some/many said he was expendable, but obviously he's a profound winner on the defensive side of the ball. But as I see there are still doubters, even after he's proved himself a leviathan of football tactic and skill. Keep up the ill-advised blasphemy, though. Floyd only eats the negative and converts it to power.
i agree with this. if the last two weeks have put an end to the denard to the bench talk, they should also end any idea that Floyd should be the #1 cb on a top tier defense. We should see Countess make a big jump by next year, with Floyd yielding that spot.
we hear his name is when it is connected to football.
The very best thing is that he will be back for another year. One more off-season to perfect his game, not to mention having time to work on the lift with Lewan.
I thought the coaches really had to figure out what they had this season and the play calling got much better as the season went along. The play calling against MSU was terrible but was as much about coaching transition as anything. The coaches seem to understand what they have now and the players are responding well. DenardI should have a great bowl and a tremendous senior year.
He will be the undisputed most dangerous player in CFB next season, even if he throws minimally. I can't wait!
The Bottom Line IS GOOD JOB MICH
I still need to see the Game again, but at this point I really gotta give a lot of credit to Borges.
Denard is always the fastest guy on the field while also being an accurate passer with a strong arm. He basically allows an offense to do things that no other offense can do.
However, we knew about that before the year, and what we have learned this year is just how difficult it is to exploit those gifts in the game. When passing, Denard is too short to see and take advantage of passing lanes like you want out of a QB and has a tendency to rush leading to underthrown balls off his back foot and fuck-it-chuck-its into multiple defenders. When running with the ball, he is hesitant with his decisions, causing him to bounce-bounce-bounce against quick defenses and miss tons of opportunities on option reads.
He is improving, but all of these are problems and will remain problems. We all knew when used correctly Denard was as productive and dangerous as any player in the nation. We learned this year just how restricted the position he can succeed from really is (if that makes sense).
As a doubter, it wasn't Denard's abilities I doubted (although I was far from impressed at times), but Borges' ability to use Denard in a way that he could be productive. At this point, he obviously can, I was obviously wrong, and I can't wait to see what this offense looks like when the Game rolls around again next year.
Denard was a 53% passer prior to Saturday. Saying Denard is "accurate" is like saying Kate Upton is "ugly."
Denard had a great game on Saturday. Phenomenal. But let's not forget that he had some horrible passing days this season and threw 14 picks. He's still a work in progress.
100% correct. Nobody, certainly not me, would logically say that Denard Robinson's throwing ability is up to the level of Brady's, or Griese's or Harbaugh's. He had some rough games this season throwing the ball. Luckily for Michigan, Denard's legs can frequently compensate for his aerial mistakes. Denard is no Tom Brady throwing the ball, but Tom Brady is no Denard running the ball, either.
That isn't the whole of the issue, though. Brady and Griese and Harbaugh weren't the backups sitting on the bench—Devin Gardner was, and the issue in question is whether Devin Gardner should have supplanted Denard as the starting QB. I haven't seen a single thing from Gardner, during games or in spring practice, which shows he should be the permanent starter. Evidently, the coaching staff had the same view of things.
Don has shown how you can acknowledge Denard's limitations without being -- well, without being Magnus-like about it. I look forward to the day when a Michigan quarterback lives up to Magnus's expectations of what a college QB should be.
You are one of the conductors on the Denard hate-train. Its amazing the vendetta some of our more "intelligent" posters have against him.
Speaking of progress: Denard was a 67.8% passer over his last three games when we played our toughest stretch of defenses. He was 60% + in all three games. He also threw 5 TDs to 2 picks. Seems like he's right where he should be after a mixed start with a new HC/OC/Offensive staff that didn't recruit him (something everyone seems to forget).
I'm not surprised though: You're one of several people on here who have trashed Denard with false information this season. After all, you were the one claiming that he was woefully inaccurate last year and most of his completions were due to his receivers...when anyone who goes back and watches the "Every Snap" vidoes from last year can tell you that is a load of shit.
Denard had a monster November!
Denard has repeatedly shown that, when he isn't pressured, can step into his pass, and isn't making a spectacularly bad read he will regularly make a good pass. Remember that Borges used the passing game mostly as a method of stretching the defense vertically. Denard was asked to hang in the pocket and heave it long. As the season has progressed the offense became far more controlling by stretching the field horizontally with zone blocking and crossing routes. When not trying to throw into coverage he has been extremely accurate on the slants and crossing routes.
Through 12 games:
DR: 133-237-14; completion%: 56.1 18 TDs Passing efficiency rating: 142.24
DG: 11-23-1; completion%: 47.8 1 TD Passing efficiency rating: 117.76
Yep, these facts conclusively prove that Devin Gardner should have been starting over Denard Robinson.
Eh, I'm with you that DRob should have been the starter, but Gardner's sample size is way too small to make any conclusions. I think he would have had better passing numbers if he was alllowed to stay in for more than a play here or there.
You don't think that there was a reason WHY Gardner was never in for more than a play here or there most of the time?
decision could be based on things having little to do with his throwing skills. Drob clearly brings more speed and also a leadership component that DG may be lacking. Drob may also be a better improvisor. DG may be a better passer but it may not be enough to warrant giving up the speed/leadership/intangible factors Drob provides.
There was a time not so long ago that this board was in an uproar that RR had moved the 'kid who could not throw' ahead of Tate. The rabble rabble could be heard across the B1G as clowns said that we would be screwed with Denard at QB.
The simple fact is that Denard was better for RR's system than Tate (and actually went to class which always helps).
It is not out of relm of reason to suggest that Devin is better for the offense that Borges wants to run... eventually...but thank goodness Borges figured out how to use Denard in the short-term.
I for one am in no hurry to see a team leader like Denard get moved to another position, but if it happens in Spring, I'll trust the coaches.
Those people were not all crazy. There were times when DRob's performance warranted such speculation. His absolutely transcendent performance on Saturday doesn't retroactively change the past.
I certainly hope that the last 2 games were indicative of the proverbial "lightbulb" turning on for the Borge's offense. It looked that way, and, if true, the sky is the limit for Senior Denard.
Prior to Neb and tOSU I was thinking the tea leaves said Denard would be moving to a Percy Harvin type role and DG starting next year. After Neb and tOSU though it looks like Denard and Borges have found the same wavelength and all is well. Denard has played two excellent games in terms of passing and definitely goes forward as the starter. His running in Neb could be been better, but he took care of business in both games on the ground and in the air.
As it stands I just really want to see the bowl go well. Some team, likely one with a decent defense, is going to have a month to get ready for Denard and I'd like to see how they do.
I can count on like two fingers how many people I heard calling to "bench" Denard. This is just one of many ways that one side of the argument clouded the issue with politics. Just because they turned out to be right (heads!) doesn't make them any less full of shit in how they framed the debate.
As for those of us who didn't feel he was a QB in a Borges system...
I've been rooting for it to "click" for him all along. Some of us just got tired of waiting when we were passing mid season with seemingly zero improvment. I'm glad he's got there. I personally backed off when I finally thought I seen improvemement in the Iowa game... And again in the Illinois game... We all know about the past two weeks.
I have not heard a peep from my cousin's husband that was completely in the bench Denard camp during the past three weeks. He is one of those fans that will throw any player on this team under the bus the first moment of adversity they experience (heck he was throwing verlander under the bus during the playoffs).
The last couple weeks, I think it's obvious Denard plays A LOT better when he's smiling on the sideline, jumping up and down, having fun and "eatin'". You didn't see that for the majority of the season, and that's when he struggled most. But I think starting the Illinois game? That's when you could see him having more fun, eatin' and dancing and smiling. And look what happened! All in all, if Denard plays like this next year, he could take Michigan to new heights. GO BLUE!
Why post this? I agree with you, but dragging up one of yesterday's debates with an "I told you so" was almost guaranteed to start a crap storm like the one here.
Did anyone get a picture of the scoreboard with the final score? I would like to get a copy of it if anyone has one. HAIL TO THE VICTORS!
Been about the play calling. Look at some of the plays we ran against ND, State, and Iowa. Obviously Denard was out of his element. As much as some of you are happy with Borges all we did the last two games is run the offense we should have always run. Exactly why we lost to State and Iowa was not running the offense Denard fits amazingly in. As happy as I am with a 10 win season and beating that shit school from Ohio Borges blew those games and a great chance to be 12-0.
I just have to point out that Denard has 35 Rushing TDs. A-Train's record is 55. If Denard gets 2 rushing TDs in the bowl game, he will have 18 TDs on the season and will need 18 next year to tie the record. There is a chance that Denard sets the record for career rushing TDs next year. That is insane.
There is also a chance that he breaks/ties the record for most Rushing TDs in a season, which is currently at 19. If he breaks that record next year, he will at least tie the previous one.
Also, He has 3 career 300+ yard passing games, with 2 this year. 2 more and he ties Chad Henne for 300+ yard games in his career.
And Finally, he is 1870 yards behind Mike Hart's career record with 14-15 games to go. That's somewhere in the 125-135 yards per game range.
I am so happy to have a player like this on our team, especially considering how humble he is.
Phenom on the the field this past Saturday. The Robinson-Toussaint combo was spectacular, plus there were few catchable balls that were dropped.
Go Blue! We BEAT OHIO!
My brother asked me at the game, "Isn't Denard perfect so far?" We hadn't seen any stats at the time, and I had to take a moment to refute my default answer of, "No, duh," and think about his performance up to that point. I could recall one incompletion, where he missed Grady long on a third down pass. Pretty nice performance.
I was far more impressed with the job he did running the ball. He was running with a purpose and doing so hard, bringing the shoulder to his tacklers. It was pretty obvious he had been coached up on his reads, especially with the inverted veer where he pulled the ball correctly several times, including on his first TD. I think he grades out really well this UFR.
Speaking of which, HOW COOL IS IT WE GET A UFR OF THE OHIO GAME that won't cause mass suicide!?
He had some struggles this season, and he had some the year before. Even with those, i just couldn't see him being benched (or moved to WR) in favor of a sophomore.
I'm just glad that he and Borges found the happy middle ground, which i think is a credit to them both. Borges used Denard better towards the end of the season, and it looks like Denard took some of Borges's mechanics coaching to heart. So he looks more comfortable in the pocket and even looks pretty slick throwing on the rollout. Add to that that he looks like he's learning to tuck and run when he doesn't have a throw and you have every DC's worst nightmare.
FWIW, my gut tells me that Gardner's going to be a monster under Borges after Denard graduates. He's getting the same mechanics coaching, but without having to apply it every Saturday. He'll have all next year to learn too.