mGrowOld

May 13th, 2011 at 11:41 AM ^

He was warming up on the sidelines and had put his helmet on.  Clearly HE thought he was 2nd string so if there was communication to him prior to the game it was poorly done at best.

While you are correct in saying we don't know what was said pre game I think it's safe to say, based on Tate's actions when Denard went down, that he considered himself #2 (as did Devon if you view his inaction the in the same light as Tate's actions). 

I know you coach football and i have as well in my past.  If you do that to one player you send a powerful and negative message to the rest of the team that you might be next. 

gbdub

May 13th, 2011 at 11:50 AM ^

What makes you think Tate wouldn't have considered himself the #2 (or #1) even if he had been told he was the #3? We can't know for sure either way, but in a tossup between "Tate feeling entitled" and "RR being explicitly dishonest" I'd lean toward the former.

Magnus

May 13th, 2011 at 1:11 PM ^

There's a fine line when it comes to a player's mentality.

Forcier should have worked during the off-season like he had something to prove.  There's lots of evidence to suggest that he thought he was on top of the world and didn't have to be a great student, citizen, etc.

HOWEVER, Forcier also had every reason to expect to be no lower than #2 on the depth chart.  You don't take a 12-game starter and demote him to #3 - behind a true freshman, no less - without fully explaining what's going on and why.  If that didn't happen, then it should have.  Players need to know what to expect.  Otherwise, there are going to be issues.

michgoblue

May 13th, 2011 at 11:30 AM ^

I am not looking to continue the whole RR debate, but how much of Tate's downfall is a result of (1) the toxic environment that took over our team last year, and (2) RR's handling of the whole QB issue.

Obviously, Tate had a ton of maturing to do.  Growing up with an overbearing father and being partially home-schooled will do that to you.  But, I really do agree with the sentiment that many expressed that RR completely mis-handled Tate in relation to the 2010 season.  The whole losing his wings thing was not only publicly humiliating, but it is not the way to bring a team together.  Ditto for putting Devin in against UConn just to make a point (putting aside the complete idiocy of buring a RS for a few snaps!). 

Part of being a coach is knowing how to handle different players.  Some players respond well to being berated on the sidelines (as RR did in 2009 to Tate), losing their wings and being publicly shamed into being good citizens.  Others, those that are less mature or are a bit more fragile in the who psyche, may respond to that type of discipline by coming unglued altogether. 

To me, Tate had great talent, but he was simply not managed well.  Much of that is on Tate, of course, but much of it is on RR, as well.  I wonder how Tate would have responded had RR called him into his office, and calmly handed him signed transfer papers saying "perhaps this is in your best interest, since you obviously don't want to be a Michigan Man" as Lloyd did to Braylon.

gbdub

May 13th, 2011 at 11:42 AM ^

RR isn't the only one that had a falling out with the Forciers though - apparently Dave Brandon did as well. And that family is clearly a bit whack. And this whole "transferring to Miami - not really" seems to indicate that they're still a bit loopy. Finally, Tate's ultimate downfall wasn't lack of playing time or attitude in the weight room, it was failure to do his homework - and that's on Tate.

Yes, it's important to manage lots of different personalities if you're a football HC, but some kids are unmanageable, and you can't hurt the team to keep one guy happy. RR probably played a role, but at least from what we've seen, I'd say it's maybe 10% RR 10% circumstance 10% Denard is a beast and a friendly one at that and 70% Tate.

michgoblue

May 13th, 2011 at 11:50 AM ^

I wasn't saying that Tate and his nutty family are not at fault.  My only point is that we may never have gotten to this point - the fallout with DB, the whole failure to do his homework, etc. - had RR handled Tate differently.

I am not claiming to know - although I bet Bacon's book will shed more light on it - about the details of the RR-Tate relationship.  But, it makes sense than when you have a kid with a fragile psyche from a sheltered, pressure-filled background, embarassing that kid in front on his teammates (the wings) and then millions of fans on TV (Devin against UConn) may not be the best way to handle the situation.  Hell, the kid was coming off of a season where he was on the cover of SI, and was even being mentioned as a Heisman candidate for 1/2 of the season (as a true freshman).  Going from that to losing his wings and not even being the back-up had to be next to impossible.

gbdub

May 13th, 2011 at 11:53 AM ^

He wasn't the only guy that went wingless, just the highest profile. Should RR have gone easier on him than the rest of the players just because Tate had a larger, more fragile ego? Regardless of the wisdom of the earn your wings stuff, once you've decided on doing it you can't change the rules for one player.

michgoblue

May 13th, 2011 at 3:38 PM ^

Not saying that Tate should have been treated differently - he shouldn't have done the "no wings" thing for anyone.  Punishment should be done privately. 

Make the kids who slacked do stairs at 6:00 a.m for a month or so as Lloyd did.  It sure worked out well with Braylon and others.

 

JeepinBen

May 13th, 2011 at 11:54 AM ^

Had Tate handled himself differently, he never would have gotten here. What if he said "I was on SI as a freshman, I should work my ass of to be on SI every week" as opposed to doing whatever he did to lose his wings? (miss work outs, classes, whatever it was).

It's a big what if game. Maybe RR didn't manage him perfectly, but this in my eyes is on Tate. He said himself it's so hard to fail out of Michigan, but he did

jmblue

May 13th, 2011 at 12:20 PM ^

RR made his share of mistakes but I don't see this as a huge one.  He probably did something similar at WVU to discipline players, and we don't know about it because it worked out.   Given the history of the three Forcier boys (all three transferred) and the fact that Tate had a tendency to let the whole world know whenever he was upset (whether by twitter, texting reporters or making his body language obvious, like in the UConn game), I think we're just talking about a case of a kid with an entitled attitude who hasn't had enough people say "No" to him in his lifetime. 

Blue in Yarmouth

May 13th, 2011 at 12:46 PM ^

I was a vocal RR supporter but have to agree that the "wingless" helmet may have been a bit over the top but I don't think it was that big a deal really. If you've played sports you know you have to have thick skin, and if the worst thing that happens to you is you get shown up in public by your coach...that's not too big a deal. I don't think it is too much for a young 20 something with an ego the size of California to deal with. 

As to the rest of the feedback about Devin and the red shirt and Tate thinking he is the number two...I have to call BS. First of all, none of us know what RR said or didn't say to Tate prior to that game, but what we do know know is Tate was in the dog house for numerous reason and was being disciplined in some form.

I have been reading this blog for a long time and I know how important people think integrity is around here. So lets say that Tate was being disciplined for all that had transpired since the previous season and part of that discipline is he doesn't get to play in the UCONN game. What should RR have done? Let him go in to save face since he threw on his helmet and started warming up? Perhaps he should have let him go in to save Devin's redshirt?

I know what the answer to these questions would be if the coach was anyone but RR. Everyone would have come down on RR for being like MD if he let Tate play just to save Devin's redshirt. They would have shit on him if he put Tate in regardless of the fact that he was being disciplined because he was clearly a better option than Devin as well. 

It is clear that some people just continue to want to bitch about RR and pick apart every decision he made while at UM. Let's just give it a break. He's gone now and we have what so many fans who were calling for RR's head wanted in the first place...a "michigan man". So lets just leave the whole RR shit in the past and move on for pete sake. 

We can all agree that he made some poor decisions and at times exercised poor judgement, which can be said of just about evey person I have ever met. The bottom line is none of this bitching is going to change anything, so let's just be happy and look to the future (which looks bright for UM).

blue in dc

May 13th, 2011 at 12:22 PM ^

I have always thought that the handling of 2009 did not help either. While Tate's stats fell later in the season, in part because competition got better, they also fell because he got hurt. I understand why you don't talk about your qb being hurt during the season, I don't think it was asking to much for RR to stand up for Tate after the season and talk about how gritty he was and how much Tate took one for the team. While Tate had every chance to just man up and deal with it, I can see why feeling like having his coach didn't have his back hurt. While his immaturity did not help, most people I know don't do as good a job for bosses that don't have their backs.
<br>
<br>While Bo was a tough disciplinarian, he also had his players backs. There were a number of post game comments from RR that made it seem to me that wasn't as much the case with RR
<br>
<br>

tomer

May 13th, 2011 at 11:04 AM ^

I really like Tate. Notice I still do. I think he got a little cocky and definetly devoloped a dickish attitude but give the guy a break, he is what 20 years old? I am 24 and I can attest that I get a little swollen when I'm dropping tres on fools at the gym.

In all seriousness though, I thought Tate was a good young player and he was very accurate. That may be the most underrated part of his game. So he made some erronious reads from time to time...we only saw him as a fresh and a little as a sophmore. I wish him the best of luck wherever it is he ends up.

Jasper

May 13th, 2011 at 11:09 AM ^

I remember when Montana was mentioned as a possible destination.  I think that would be perfect for him; he needs to be in a place where he'll be the unquestioned starter and get lots of reps.  Grand Valley might work, too.

Tate wasn't raised like most kids.  Failure doesn't seem to be an option in that family.  To put it precisely, they don't seem to handle demotion to second-string (or lack of ascendance to the top job) very well.

ijohnb

May 13th, 2011 at 11:38 AM ^

up at the University of What Could Have Been, a great football school with such prestigous alums as Scott Dreisbach and Ron Powlus.   

wiper

May 13th, 2011 at 11:39 AM ^

when i saw that they were getting another transfer, then that Tate wasn't going to go, my first thought was 'what a little bitch'.

bronxblue

May 13th, 2011 at 2:00 PM ^

Not that surprised since he does seem a little non-commital.  I don't get the hate for the guy - I'm sure he is a bit of a headcase, but so are a whole slew of guys who play D-1 ball.  Mallett, Newton, Pryor - those are just a couple of guys who pop in my head as being "troublemakers" at least as much as Tate, but they won more with better teams so everyone gives them a free pass.  Tate definitely disappointed with his work ethic at times both on and off the field, but he also played hurt for this team and gave them some hope during those tough years.  I'm not saying people shouldn't take issue with some of the decisions he's made, but nobody should question that he played hard for UM and had some great memories.

Zone Left

May 13th, 2011 at 3:45 PM ^

ESPN was just saying it was a "family decision." He'd probably benefit from not making decisions with his family anymore. As for grades, Miami is a fine school, but a QB with his background doesn't really need to worry about grades if the staff wants him as long as he meets NCAA mins.

ArthurTheDeuce

May 13th, 2011 at 3:55 PM ^

FWIW, I was working at the Central Michigan Spring Game and I interviwed Austin White after the game and I saw Tate there hanging out w/Austin and his family. Not sure this means anything. I certainly didn't think so at the time because I assumed he was going to The U.

gajensen

May 13th, 2011 at 4:55 PM ^

I worked at Buffalo Wild Wings for a bit, and after a home game Tate and a group of his friends (apparently not teammates) came in and were looking for seats.  Problem was, we were over capacity, as football Saturdays are inevitably packed.  This didn't seem to compute with our favorite tot, and he raised a huge stink about not getting a seat, pulling the "don't you know who I am?" line for about a half hour before storming out.

I can understand, but not excuse, arrogance.  I do not understand douchebaggery, however.  I don't feel too much sympathy for the kid. 

[email protected]

May 13th, 2011 at 11:58 PM ^

Well as far as Tate is concerned, I think he is still reeling from his academic debacle from Michigan.   I would guess those incomplete grades turned into dismal grades of D's or F's and he could not pass the academic sniff test.  A couple semesters of junior college might help him get over the academic hump, and then perhaps he will land on his feet someplace else, but he needs to figure out his life, if he doesn't end up back in college football, let alone the NFL.  That is a tall order for a young kid, who has had high expectations from his parents and peers for many years, and if he is a head-case, then perhaps he needs some serious counseling.  

I hope you guys get the post RR sarcasm out of your system, sometime this decade.  No wonder he has taken a year off to recuperate and let the dust settle.  

As far as Michigan football goes, this year of rebuilding, may not be as satisfying as some would expect.  How would everyone feel, if we lose to ND this year for the first time since Lloyd Carr left?