Tate Mistakes
I love how our defense played today for the most part. They looked very good compared to how they have played the rest of the season. It's just too bad that Tate kept giving the ball away. I have to feel like Tate gave OSU this game. Not sure what he was thinking on the last two. I love the way Tate can play, but he is a freshman and he has made some big mistakes late in the season. He didn't make all of these in the beginning, which is a little odd. He will get better, but this was a bad game for him. We had a legit shot to win, and maybe we still can, but it just didn't happen. Well done by the seniors, and we will miss you. We will be better next season, lets hope for a big W in Columbus.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:10 PM ^
He's trying to do too much, which is a classic freshman problem. The team played hard today, which gives me hope for next year.
EDIT: Also: holy crap Roundtree. four years of Forcier throwing to him is not looking so bad.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:29 PM ^
Especially late in the game, he started pressing and throwing dumb passes, getting impatient.
Overall this was probably the team's best game of the year. OSU is the best team on our schedule and we basically played them even except for a bunch of typical freshman mistakes by a freshman qb.
Don't forget we have three more years of Smith too. Decent runner who can catch the ball.
November 21st, 2009 at 4:28 PM ^
Smith is a tough guy with a lot of heart, but if he's our starting RB we are in big trouble at that position.
He'll contribute on third down, etc. But he's just far too small to be a every down back. Durability alone will keep that from happening.
November 21st, 2009 at 4:31 PM ^
I love what he's shown the past two weeks. He's a good, tough player. But I'm worried that unless he puts about 20 pounds on, he'll have trouble being an every-down back. The good thing is that we have a few other guys who should be able to contribute meaningfully.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:11 PM ^
Sad to say, but it's true.
I look forward to an open QB competition between Tate, Denard, and Gardner. Regardless who wins, our QB situation will be better next year.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:12 PM ^
went from unflappable early in the season to in a shell by the end of this game. He'll have a lot to think about this offseason, not a great taste to have in your mouth going into a nine-month offseason. Hopefully he can rebound; the DG position battle will be legit next fall.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:14 PM ^
Well, agreed - the D did way better than expected.
Tate on the other hand .... he thought his worst day ever happened a week and a half ago ....
Ah well, close down on the recruits Rich -- we want a full class of great players!
November 21st, 2009 at 3:15 PM ^
The gameplan was awesome, the D played lights out, but Tate had way too many mistakes and turnovers to come out with the W...Most, if not all of those turnovers were on him and him only. But hey, he's a true frosh and i'm still proud of our guys. Go Blue!
November 21st, 2009 at 3:15 PM ^
They did not give up today. The defense played inspired. The offense moved the ball on this good Ohio State defense. They did not quit. This was our game and we gave it away. Again.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:15 PM ^
Forcier made freshman mistakes. Guys do that. They can have a competition next year, but unless Forcier just craps the bed or Robinson makes huge strides, this team will be much better with him leading the charge than anyone else. He played poorly against one of the best defenses in the country. I'll take that as a true freshman.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:16 PM ^
He's the reason we lost today. Our D held them to 14 points, 7 of them were from Tate and another 3 INTs (including one at the 7 yard line of OSU) is what killed us today.
BUT....
1) He was our best option at QB and Denard couldn't have won this game for us today (obvious by his mop up time trying to throw the ball).
2) We had ZERO running game with Minor out, so Tate had to throw more, and thus he made more mistakes.
3) He's a true freshman
So, yeah... he's the reason we lost today, but we tend to expect WAYYYY too much from this kid, so I hope he can just stay healthy next season and lead us to a bowl game. Best of luck Tate, don't get too down on yourself.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:52 PM ^
Not to split hairs, but it was 4 INTs. There, I said it.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:53 PM ^
Whoops.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:17 PM ^
And unfortunately did freshman things against by far the best defense he faced. True freshman without great pass blocking against the best defensive line in the nation = death.
Hopefully as he matures he'll be able to throw off mistakes a bit better.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:16 PM ^
Ohio State's offense has really been pretty lackluster this year. I'm wondering if part of the reason UM's defense looked so good is simply because OSU's offense is that bad.
I don't mean to sound like a debbie downer here, but I'm not getting too optimistic about the defense simply from today's game. But, I do hope that through the off season they can progress...our lack of depth is well documented. :(
November 21st, 2009 at 3:20 PM ^
Tressell was extremely conservative on offense and didn't do many of the things that have made our defense look terrible this season.
That said, it must help our defense's confidence and psyche to have a great game (and it was a great game for the D) like this to end the season and use that as a source of hope going into next year. It also helps with recruiting for the defense to look competent.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:22 PM ^
that Ohio State was trying not lose from the start (once we gave them a TD and missed a FG). I am not saying the D didn't play better because they did.
But if OSU has to win that game - rather than watching us lose it - I think things would have been different. Maybe we win, maybe we don't, but it wouldn't have been the same game.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:16 PM ^
overall for a game with 5 turnovers.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:17 PM ^
The fumble early leads to an OSU TD: +7 OSU.
The INT late when we were inside OSU 10 yard line and likely would have scored: - 7 M.
That's a 14 point swing right there just off those 2 mistakes.
He had 3 MORE INTs than that, which, in and of itself is a bad day, but take away just those 2 plays and we win the game.
The D played well and we were so, so close. And on the plays he wasn't throwing picks, Forcier actually had a good performance today.
Turnovers, freshman mistakes by Forcier killed us.
But, compared to previous weeks, excellent play by the D. And we did what we did on O today with 2 freshman QBs and without our 2 senior tailbacks.
That should give us hope for next year, even though the loss sucks. Things are headed in the right direction, hopefully RR will still be around to finish the job he's started.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:21 PM ^
Tate is not the long term solution at QB. Denard has a long way to go with the playbook, but he will now have an entire offseason and even slow progress means he'll be the QB next year IMO. Tate can't run the spread option because he's not fast enough and can't run between tackles. It is abundantly clear that RR's system is far superior with a read option and he's not going to get that with Tate. We must hope that Denard becomes a functioning pocket passer so his speed can be utilized. That way, there will be a true read option.
I should also note the friction between RR and Tate. With all the prior training, Tate has already maxed his potential, which is littered with mistakes and sloppy play interspersed with an occasional big play. So if Denard improves his passing in the offseason and wins the job, expect a transfer.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:25 PM ^
The guy is a FRESHMAN!! And he has had to play all season with a hurt shoulder, a concussion and behind an O line that was a mess once Molk went down.
Tate will win a lot more than he will lose over his career.
Next year we have a stronger offensive line, seasoned QB's who are physically and mentally stronger and some great skill players who are hungry for victory.
We will be better!
November 21st, 2009 at 3:26 PM ^
There is so much wrong with this statement.
Tate hasn't been in the system for years or "maxed out" as a player - he had one off-season and this year. He has been an accurate pass for most of the year (59% heading into this game), and had a 12-6 TD:INT ratio (the number goes down today, I know). Give him a full offseason with the offense and some better blockers, and maybe, just maybe this freshman will improve ever so slightly.
As for DR, I like him as an athlete, but he is not going to become some elite passer in an off-season. He never had great accuracy, and he relies far too much on running the ball if the first option is covered. He will be an asset for this team, but my god you are crazy if you think he'll be the starting QB next year.
The team needs to establish a running game next year and improve on pass blocking, but I see the seeds of a good team. Tate will be the starter for at least 2 more years, and I'd be fine with him playing all 4 years. He's not perfect, but he is going to be good.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:49 PM ^
I often get a chuckle with the Forcier defenders out there. Yes, he's a true freshman, but he's been trained for this moment his entire life. Remember the train rides he took to prepare for football, or his brother Jason basically babysitting him in the offseason, or the fact that he enrolled early and had a 6 month head start? These are all signs that he's reached his ceiling.
RR doesn't run a west coast offense, but that's precisely what you're going to get with Forcier. With no read option but still a spread preference, you are going to have a west coast offense. That's the definition folks. The run game is contingent on the QB being able to run. Minor is gone and it likely wouldn't matter. You want fast, mobile O-linemen, yet you can't run the run option with Forcier. Of course you're going to see pressure.
What all of you fail to realize is that Forcier's limitation is the reason why you're not going to get more production from the backs or the line. This offense is not designed for a QB who cannot run by himself.
RR clearly prefers a run option, but if Denard doesn't pan out as a passer then the offense is going to have to change. Otherwise, we'll see the same troubling trends we've been seeing the last 8 weeks. I can see Forcier running a Power I (what Harbaugh runs at Stanford), but I cannot envision anything else. With a Power I, the line has to get bigger and Cox really has to emerge as the every down bruiser back. That's a clear change from what RR has been doing for the past 10 years or so. A west coast offense is inappropriate and would not work in the B10 in any event.
November 21st, 2009 at 4:42 PM ^
I like how you completely ignore Rich Rodriguez's history. You make it sound like the only good offense he's ever had was because of Pat White's running ability. He had success at WVU prior to the arrival of Pat White, and he had success at Tulane with Shaun King, who was a decent runner without great speed (he had like 500 or 600 yards rushing as a senior).
You're also ignoring the fact that he's a true freshman and has failed to make the proper reads in the running game. This offense is not predicated on a quarterback being able to carry the running game on his shoulders. This offense is built on being able to isolate one-on-one mismatches, and neither Forcier or Robinson has been able to run the read option properly because the game is moving too quickly for them.
Your argument might have some validity if Denard Robinson (who runs REALLY fast) were able to run the read option effectively, but he hasn't been able to, either. Forcier can run a little bit and pass pretty well, but - surprise, surprise - he's 19 years old and the game's too fast for him. Give him another year, maybe two, and this offense will be humming through the air AND on the ground.
November 21st, 2009 at 5:23 PM ^
RR doesn't clearly prefer a run-first option. He ran one at WVU because he had players that could run it effectively there. Here at Michigan, we've seen roughly even run/pass preference. Like all good coaches, he plays to his player's strengths.
Your argument that Tate is too slow for the read option is laughable. Is Colt McCoy too slow? Is Sam Bradford? Is Tim Tebow? Even Andrew Luck has run some read option out at Stanford. You don't need to be incredible straight-line speed to run the read-option effectively. You need to have the basic agility to meet the RB at the mesh point, then make a move to fake out a DE and gain a few yards. Tate does this and much more. He needs to get better at making reads both in the run game and the passing game and he'll be much more effective in the future.
November 21st, 2009 at 5:30 PM ^
McCoy, Bradford, and Luck do not run that as the base of their offense. Tebow is a bull, he's completely different. Tate will not run the read option as a base because that's not his strength, he's not a runningback, he's just a QB with the ability to scramble. It's not necessarily bad that he can't run the zone read as a base, it just means we stick with what we did this year. It will be a balanced offense like you said in the first paragraph.
OT, ill throw this in. The only problem i see with the choice at QB next year (Tate or Garnder) is that the offense will be very different between them, which not only makes it harder to chose, but harder to keep both of them up to speed. Now obviously i dont know this as a fact, but I dont see anyone putting Gardner in this offense, when he would be a lot more effective in Rod's WVU offense.
November 21st, 2009 at 7:46 PM ^
Man, you hit it on the head there. Give a guy 1.5 years. He struggles, boot him and move on to the next guy.
Man, I struggled in college my first year, and I had been in school since I was 5. Of course, I still graduated with honors as I improved with more college experience and better studying habits. But I should have been kicked out because I had reached my ceiling after my freshman year.
I get it that you are unhappy with the team, but stop making up dumb arguments about a freshman. Most players who line up at a major college program likely has been preparing to play for years, yet many still do struggle their first years. Jebus, give the kid a chance before you overreact.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:35 PM ^
If M could execute its passing game to the flats, the offense with Tate at QB would be excellent and able to keep defenses permanently off balance. They can't yet, maybe they will next year.
Tate is a solid passer, looked better in the pocket today than at any time this season. He made a few soul crushing mistakes, but he is a true freshman. As the years go by, those will be replaced by confident play within the offense and the moxie-infused plays we have seen scattered around already this season.
To sum up, my point is that it is foolish to give up on a guy, especially in that position, after his true freshman season.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:17 PM ^
Probably has a lot to do with his age but all the facebook crap and him logging into a friends account and posting on a Michigan Fan site (allegedly) makes me think he is mentally fragile. His "confidence" seems to be more of a cover, I hope he grows up. So, let's all thank him for gift wrapping a victory for Terrell Pryor and the Buckeyes.
And, thanks for making me look like a jackass to my Buckeye friends, too. I made the argument that he was more equipped to win big games right now (not more talented, mind you) than Pryor is. Every game since that argument, Michigan has lost and Forcier has looked lost and confused.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:25 PM ^
Jesus Christ, cut him some slack. It's not like he wasn't trying out there. OSU has a really good defense, and he was trying to make plays to get the team back in the game. Yeah, his turnovers hurt, but it's a team game. Lots of things didn't go well today. Not just Tate's turnovers.
Also, maybe you shouldn't run your mouth about a freshman quarterback four games into his career if you aren't prepared to look like a dumbass.
November 22nd, 2009 at 12:55 AM ^
His turnovers more than hurt, they cost Michigan the game.
He will be fine, I recognize that he is a freshman, I was joking about thanking him for making me look bad.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:20 PM ^
noting:
"I love the way Tate can play, but he is a freshman and he has made some big mistakes late in the season"
I also like how Tate plays and he made mistakes that would be reasonable for any freshman in such a big game. If GERG can scheme the D like that next year and more pieces for RichRod's system one can see how things can work out. I like the idea of so much QB competition and Roy Roundtree, sir you are a revelation.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:20 PM ^
Well that was painful to watch, but it could have been a lot worse. The team played very hard and kept it closer than it should have been. The defense held an I-A opponent to under 30 for the first time since MSU, the offense was moving the ball, just not into the endzone, progress, but only a little bit at a time.
At some point when most of our players aren't freshmen and sophomores, our team is going to come out on top. And maybe we won't turn the ball over 4-5 times a game. Tate had a bad day against a great defense. No surprise there. The line wasn't strong enough to get the running game going, Tate had to throw, he couldn't do it. IMO with time on the field and in the weight room, Tate will become a guy that wins a lot of games for Michigan. I hope that his bad experiences don't affect him down the road. I think that he's a great player and so they will not.
Also, I hope that the environment and the hard effort by this team will make a favorable impression on the visiting recruits.
November 21st, 2009 at 5:56 PM ^
...I forget when Tate threw his first interception, but one of them in the first half should have been disallowed due to a missed pass interference call by the referee. The defender was all over our receiver (man, I can't remember any names right now - probably because I was so incensed after the play), back turned, all over our guy, and the ball bounced off the defender or the receiver (I forget) and into the hands of an OSU safety. After the turnover OSU drove in for a touchdown... it was unlucky and an awful call (same as the non-call helmet to helmet that started the UM drive) and will forgive Tate for that one. Anyway, if Tate can learn how to avoid sacks by being a little smarter, he can be good... I'm still in the air though. I do know that Pryor is completely unimpressive
November 21st, 2009 at 6:12 PM ^
That was Denard Robinson's fly pattern. It was an egregious missed call by the officials. Robinson actually looked pretty good at adjusting to the ball in the air. Perhaps he has a future there in a couple years after all...
November 21st, 2009 at 3:21 PM ^
His mistakes were not entirely on him alone. Having ANY semblance of a running game or being able to pass w/o having to fear for his life whould have gone a long way to helping out a FRESHMAN trying to beat the best D in the B10.
I thought D'Rob played pretty well early on and I wish we would have seen a little more of him coming on and off for change of pace.
Whatever - the future is bright. Rich Rod will get this thing turned around once we get 1 or 2 more classes under the fold.
GO BLUE!
November 21st, 2009 at 3:28 PM ^
It will be a long off-season for that kid. And he is just a kid. Hopefully he's got a short memory.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:34 PM ^
And for the record, here are Tate's stats for the game:
23/38 226 5.9 1-4
Outside of the INTs, he was really good considering he had no running game to speak of. He made some mistakes, but he also moved this team up and down the field. I have faith that he'll be even better next year.
EDIT:
And for the record, here is Henne's first OSU game (on the road, but also with a much better team):
27/54 328 6.1 2-2
So Tate with a better completion %, nearly the same number of yards/pass, and no Mike Hart to keep the defense honest.
Giving up on Tate now is just insane.
November 21st, 2009 at 5:35 PM ^
Agreed except for one nitpicky point: Hart was either injured or virtually non-existent in 3/4 OSU games.
November 21st, 2009 at 6:38 PM ^
I agree. But he still had 61 yards, and was at least somewhat productive.
November 22nd, 2009 at 12:59 AM ^
Outside of the 4 INT's???? That number matters more than any other number up there. And don't forget the fumble in the endzone.
No one is saying give up on the kid but having blind faith in him isn't something I am prepared to do, either. If he plays like shit, it is okay to say he played like shit. I will be the first to praise him when he plays good.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:32 PM ^
i think that maybe we could have done a little better on offense if the wide recievers helped a little bit. When tate scrambled they just stood thier and watched as thier QB was scrambling for his life. they need to stop sitting on the fucking route and try to get open. adn tate needs to learn how to either throw the ball away or learn to not hold the ball away from his body toward the ground and this isnt high school just cause he ran circles around defense with the same speed kovaks doesnt mean he can do it in college the coaches need to beat that into his brain
that is all
November 21st, 2009 at 3:32 PM ^
Anyone else believe Tate would be more effective in an Air Raid type offense, instead of the spread n' shred?
November 21st, 2009 at 3:34 PM ^
His arm is not strong enough nor is his release quick enough to be effective in the type of offense. Maybe in the future when he gets stronger.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:54 PM ^
I feel like the Air Raid would eliminate Tate's scrambling ability which is one of his strong points. It doesn't always work out, but as everyone says he is just a freshman.
I think he's going to be very effective in this offense. It is turning into a spread 'n shred with a lot of passing.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:39 PM ^
look, tate had a bad day. anyone with half a brain already knows that. it comes down to this - look at his body of work this season and then make a judgement about him. hes come in as a true freshman, dealt with a line that's often been on par with swiss cheese, and not had his best RBs with him the backfield. his receivers have consistently had a case of the dropsies. he's only just found his go-to guy in roundtree. he's done a great job this season. he can only get better.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:43 PM ^
Let's all not forget that Tate had a slightly separated shoulder (AC joint sprain) in the Indiana game and really hasn't been the same ever since (with the exception of the second half of the Michigan State game.
Clearly he made a ton of mistakes in this game, but he is still the future at QB. You can reasonably assume that his shoulder will heal and his decision making will improve in the offseason. It is not a reasonable assumption that Denard will somehow transform into a competent passer.
Just pray that we get some answers at LB and in the secondary, that our RBs can stay healthy and be competent next year, and we should be pretty decent next year.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:58 PM ^
but at the same time, I feel that we wouldn't even have been in this game if it weren't for Tate. Smith had some pretty good runs here and there, but overall the run game was absolutely shut down. He made a lot of good plays and converted some big third downs. How about that 23-yarder to Mathews on 3rd and long?
He's a freshman, and I feel like he really did seem to come on strong again at the end of the year. He made some big mistakes this year, but he also did it against the defense who more than anyone in the country makes QBs pay for mistakes. To think that he won't be the starter going into next year is asinine. More than anyone, Tate gives us the chance to win.
Furthermore, to think that DG won't be redshirting is also ridiculous. Tate has what it takes to be successful here and wasting a year of eligibility for DG rather than getting a year of separation between he and Tate/Robinson would be foolish. We're not bringing in Terrelle Pryor for Todd Boeckman, here, people. With our talent at QB, DG will be able to redshirt.
Tate finished the year with a 58.7% completion rate, 2050 yards, and TD/INT ratio of 13/10 (with this being his only multi-INT game). I'll take that from a true freshman starter anyday.
Tate, rough finish, but thanks for what you did this year. Minus a few rough games (Iowa, Penn State, Ohio State), you were pretty much as much as I could've expected.
November 21st, 2009 at 4:00 PM ^
Also, two of those picks were essentially punts. The long INTs on 3rd down were more or less a wash. Obviosuly completing those would've been great, but they didn't hurt us in field position. The unforced fumble and red zone pick were killers, but he was a Freshman trying to be a hero. I think we will be just fine in his hands.
November 21st, 2009 at 4:47 PM ^
True freshman starting
Early wins raise hopes of bowl
Punched in the soul dong