Should Tate start next week?
First, I am a Denard "True Believer". I must confess that last season I was an enthusiastic Tate fan and I believed that once a suitable back up arrived Denard would be an ideal slot receiver. Denard has shown that he is ideally suited to play QB in this offense and moving him would limit its effectiveness.
Here's why I suggest we might want to start Tate:
1 - To protect Denard - Since we are counting on him to lead us through the Big Ten season we may want to limit his wear and tear when we can.
2 - To prepare Tate - clearly Tate worked his way into the dog house over the summer, however it looks like this week he "embraced" his role on the team. Giving him some substantial playing time would better prepare him if Denard misses any time.
3 - To temper expectations for Denard - Denard has become the hottest thing in college football. Every week fans and foes are going to want to know what he's done. As Six Zero pointed out in another post, this puts a lot of pressure on Denard and a lot of people will root for him to fail. Postponing his next start won't eliminate the expectations but it will temper the hype a little.
4 - Demonstrate the effectiveness of the offense - It is being suggested that this offense is basic and only works because we caught "lightning in a bottle" with Denard. By showing the offense still dominates with Tate, recruits and fans will realize that this success won't go away when Denard does.
Obviously, Coach Rodriguez will do what he thinks is best. I just wondered what you all thought this suggestion.
Let the debate begin.
September 12th, 2010 at 11:19 AM ^
Denard should play until a comfortable lead is established. Go up 40-0 and then put in Devin and then put in Tate
September 12th, 2010 at 11:22 AM ^
but at some point where the game's in control. It'll be interesting to see who goes in 1st. I love me some Tater, but I think Devin's the future and #2. Don't know how Tate will handle that going forward.
September 12th, 2010 at 12:13 PM ^
There is also part of me that thinks Rich Rod is much much smarter than we have all give him credit for. Time has provided me more of an opportunity to look into this man's mind and I must tell you, I am starting to believe he is the smartest guy in the room. His "aw shucks" country boy spiel aside, this guy is smart.
Why do I say that? I believe Tate is probably a long way away from being designated #2 knowing that that may cause the new starter to be constantly be looking over his shoulder. Tate still has a fairly sizable fan following to say little of the overzealous, demanding family that he comes from. RR wants Denard totally comfortable and he likely knows that putting as much distance between Tate and seat 1 will go along way towards doing that.
Besides Denard has proven that he deserves to be comfortably #1. From his play on to field to the way that he has conducted himself off the field, Denard has earned the right to be comfortable. Keeping Devin at 2 likely helps with that objective.
September 12th, 2010 at 1:21 PM ^
I learned from his pre-game interview yesterday that he had great grades and considered a career in law. He's no dummy.
September 12th, 2010 at 11:19 AM ^
Are you serious about this, or am I missing the joke?
September 12th, 2010 at 11:21 AM ^
There are a lot of stupid posts and stupid posters that need to take a break, or get probated for a little while. Maybe posters below a certain point thresh hold shouldn't be allowed to post after a game. (I realize this op has over 1k or whatever)
September 12th, 2010 at 3:11 PM ^
Why do you have a picture of Brian as your avatar? That threw me a little.
September 12th, 2010 at 11:30 AM ^
Why the hell would we burn Tate's redshirt against UMass?
September 12th, 2010 at 12:19 PM ^
They way RR has been shuttling in Devin Gardner, I'm starting to wonder if this isn't a real option. If Tate never sees the field this year, we can retroactively redshirt him can't we?
September 12th, 2010 at 3:23 PM ^
You can redshirt anyone in any year I believe. Woolfolk should have the same opportunity (although his is due to injury).
September 12th, 2010 at 11:20 AM ^
Denard will take the first snap and probably the first few series providing M takes a sizable lead. Everyone else will then get playing time. Hopefully Jack Kennedy takes the victory knee.
September 12th, 2010 at 11:20 AM ^
Denard plays until the 1st half is over or we are up by 28+, whichever comes first.
September 12th, 2010 at 12:53 PM ^
Denard should get the first half, unless it's a complete blowout. Tate and Devin can split up the second half.
September 12th, 2010 at 11:20 AM ^
Jack Kennedy should start.
September 12th, 2010 at 11:20 AM ^
Denard should start and play until we are up 14-21 points (probably first quarter) and then alternate Devin and Tate.
Denard still needs to get his timing down better with the receivers on the longer throws. In the ND game he overthrew several open receivers on what would have been big gains or TDs.
September 12th, 2010 at 11:51 AM ^
For starters, the long passing game needs work. You keep Denard in until we have a comfortable lead, and then substitute. We also need to get our other RB's in the mix. This only works with Denard running the show. Remember, our toughest competition is ahead of us and we need to get the O ready for the Big Ten show.
September 12th, 2010 at 12:12 PM ^
Denard plays until he can rack up at least 503 yards of offense, beating his 502 against Notre Dame. After that point Devin or Tate can play.
September 12th, 2010 at 11:20 AM ^
you play all of your 1s if they are able to go, get a comfortable lead and then put in the backups.
this thread made my head hurt...
September 12th, 2010 at 11:21 AM ^
And why should we be debating this?? And maybe OSU shouldn't start Pryor, or Wisky, Tolzein
September 12th, 2010 at 11:21 AM ^
I though Tate should have been in on the last drive against ND and move Denard to slot or running back to surprise the Irish. Sometime I wonder about RR and his stratagems.
September 12th, 2010 at 11:21 AM ^
I personally believe that Devin Gardner should and I think will get more playing time than Tate. Should be interesting to see.
Lets just worry about winning first.
September 12th, 2010 at 11:21 AM ^
If we're up by more than 21 and DRob is still playing with the first string I'm going to be a little disappointed. 3-4, maybe 5 drives for DRob, 5-8 for Tate and the rest for DG since it's apparent RR is going to be full on stupid and not redshirt him.
September 12th, 2010 at 11:22 AM ^
Denard will start and throw some bombs on UMass to get the lead. Not much running for health reasons. Then give Tate and Devin their due. RB's will step up this week as well.
September 12th, 2010 at 11:23 AM ^
But there is still a chance Michigan loses next week. You play the people that you think are best unless they otherwise can't play. If/when they get a big lead, then we'll see the other QBs.
September 12th, 2010 at 11:24 AM ^
... Denard is the starting QB. First two games, all remaining games. He has only started twice!
Devin and Tate can get some mop-up time in the next three games.
Your point #1 is part of the game, the rest are, in order, irrelevant, unnecessary and absurd.
And #2 in particular: Tate is a third string QB at this point. He forfeited any special consideration with his immature conduct during the UConn game and his histrionics after.
The Forcier is not with us.
September 12th, 2010 at 11:25 AM ^
Never assume a win against any opponent. Ever. Denard starts unless there is a compelling reason (e.g. injury) to keep him out.
We need a lot more wins to bring our program back to respectability. If and when we have a comfortable lead against opponents who may appear to be less challenging on paper, then we bring in Tate and Devin to light 'em up for a little more.
September 12th, 2010 at 11:44 AM ^
Actually, I think if you are ranked #13 in the country and are playing a team like James Madison, then you can assume a victory. Otherwise you shouldn't. Oh, wait a minute...
September 12th, 2010 at 12:26 PM ^
September 12th, 2010 at 12:44 PM ^
But like Smokey said, "Man, why you bringin' up old shit?"
September 12th, 2010 at 11:26 AM ^
Gardner is ahead of tate on the depth chart anyway. Plus why punish denard by not starting him. You really think an FCS school in UMass will hit him harder than the Irish did yesterday. Let RR decide when he comes out next week.
September 12th, 2010 at 11:27 AM ^
Someone didn't watch the James Madison/Va Tech game. That is precisely why you start your #1's and beat the hell out of the opponent, then insert your #2's. Never assume you will win a game. That is a terrible thing to teach a young football team.
September 12th, 2010 at 11:34 AM ^
After App State and Toledo, I can't even believe we're having this conversation.
September 12th, 2010 at 11:28 AM ^
we need to put pedal to the metal.... on offense and defense !!!
No Mercy.
September 12th, 2010 at 11:31 AM ^
will tate ever see #2 again?
September 12th, 2010 at 11:34 AM ^
Where is Vincent Smith going?
September 12th, 2010 at 11:36 AM ^
meant #2 on the depth chart behind denard.
September 12th, 2010 at 11:32 AM ^
With the successes of South Dakota, JMU and North Dakota in recent weeks, I'm perfectly happy starting Denard Robinson against UMass until it's 42-0.
Let's not end up like Kansas or Virginia Tech.
September 12th, 2010 at 11:45 AM ^
Tate can start, if he knows how to kick field goals.
September 12th, 2010 at 12:13 PM ^
He does have a decent leg -- that 50 yard punt last year was beautiful...
September 12th, 2010 at 11:48 AM ^
There's a lot of hate in this thread. I posed a hypothetical. As I said, the head coach gets to decide who starts.
I actually agree with the theory that Denard should start the first few series until we are up comfortably. I started the thread to have a discussion.
1 - those of you who don't think we should worry about Denard getting hurt should talk to Oregon fans about Dennis Dixon.
2 - those of you who really think that Devin would be the longterm answer if Denard went down may be right, but I suspect RichRod would be more comfortable with a sophomore with 12 starts that a freshman with zero.
September 12th, 2010 at 12:01 PM ^
I suspect RR would go with Devin. While Tate's got experience, next few games will give Devin lots of practical reps and he's a better fit for RR's offense. It'll be an interesting competition between Denard and Devin next year. As I said, I was on the Tater Express, but just don't see where RR's offense progressing under Tate.
September 12th, 2010 at 11:56 AM ^
the second half.
September 12th, 2010 at 12:00 PM ^
I still think he should get moved to slot receiver....Think of the damage he could do there, or even at running back!
September 12th, 2010 at 12:02 PM ^
Why do people still think Denard would be better at another position? He is the best athlete on the field and gets the ball in his hands every snap. He is a quarterback now.
September 12th, 2010 at 3:05 PM ^
= fail
September 12th, 2010 at 12:05 PM ^
...Tate should be the #2, but of course, I'm not monitoring practices. (Not that there's anything wrong with that!)
September 12th, 2010 at 12:13 PM ^
DROB has earned his starting spot and should start next week. If we build a comfortable lead then I think the second string and finally the third string QBs should play. My guess is that Gardner must be practicing better than Tate to be 2nd string. If Tate improves his practices, I'm sure he could become the backup again. Both Gardner and Tate will most likely see playing time during the next two weeks.
September 12th, 2010 at 12:24 PM ^
I hope you're not serious about starting him. They must have a good reason for benching last year's starter behind a true freshman even if it was just for a few snaps. Denard should definitely start, but they should let someone else get playing time once the game is safely out of reach for UMass. Whether that's Gardner or Tate I don't really care, but I wouldn't bench the guy that has been the biggest part of the past two wins. That just doesn't make sense to me.
PS - We don't need to show the effectiveness of RR's offense anymore. Obviously it works with more QBs than just Denard (evidence: Pat White at WV and Tate in the first part of last year). We need to show that the defense can hold their own.
September 12th, 2010 at 12:26 PM ^
The old cliche of,"we have to improve every game" isn't just a bunch of BS. The college football season being only 12-13 games makes it important to give our young talent experience. More than that, Denard wouldn't be the only one to benefit. The OL will getting more snaps to be able to anticipate where Denard will be. The WR will be a little bit more used to catching a ball coming from Denard. It would be silly to waste such an opportunity to tweak our game the next couple weeks.
September 12th, 2010 at 12:31 PM ^
...the Fourth Quarter.