at any time
i would find this more credible if it was about Tom Crean
at any time
But could you start using the word "have" instead of "of" (i.e. "should have" instead of "should of"). It's kinda annoying
You know, I almost thought Godwin's Law was about to come into effect, but then you chose slavery over Nazis. Well played sir.
You're the one looking more deserving of a banhammer. All I see you doing is calling people names who disagree with you.
I think the comment is totally off base, but banning for expressing an opinion rather than being a jerk seems excessive to me.
I just don't understand why you would take out the most explosive player on the field just because he was having a rough day. If you take him out and replace him with Tate, what is that saying about RR's confidence in Denard? Why create a controversy on this team? If you pull him that will stick with Denard. You are basically telling him that if he isn't getting 400 yards of offense and 4+ touchdowns, Tate's on his way in. I liked that RR stuck with him, hopefully this shows Denard that this is his team and RR has confidence in him.
When the threat of Denard running the ball was taken away late in the game, I wouldn't have minded if Tate Forcier got a chance to come in and throw the ball. Tate's better at reading defenses, in my opinion. A lot of Denard's passes have been completed because of the threat of him running the ball.
I could agree that Tate reads pass defenses better than Denard, but do you think Tate makes better zone read calls than Denard (that's an honest question that you're better equipped to answer than I)? Unless the game is really out of hand, a 15 yard Denard run is dangerous and useful until really late in the game.
I'd trust Tate a bit more to squeeze in the tight passes that State was leaving open all day as well (as long as the receivers could hold on). Trouble is, I didn't say to myself, "Man, Denard just isn't going to get it done today" until the game was out of hand. Sometimes QBs have a bad day and there's nothing you can do but give someone else a go. But I wouldn't have made that call until it was too late anyway, which is where I suspect RR found himself.
I think Denard is better at the zone read option, but when you're down by three scores halfway through the fourth quarter . . . is the zone read option really that important?
I guess I would have been okay with Tate if Denard was hurt or seemed very lost out there, but the game was still in the balance well into the 4th quarter. If you pick Denard as your starter, you have to be willing to suffer through these types of games as he improves. Now, if Denard struggles the next few games maybe you give Tate a chance, but nobody is going to grow and improve if there is a near-constant fear of being pulled after a bad series.
Huh? At no point last season was Tate in great danger of losing his starting spot except due to injuries. Denard had one bad game - everyone does. Let's see how he responds next week - my guess is that he returns to form.
This thread is ridiculous. Denard is our best quarterback and despite some bad decisions he didn't even have that bad of an outing. Not once did I think of putting in Tate and I imagine RR was in the same boat. Denard is our most explosive weapon so he should get the ball every snap imo.
...once we got down 14, then 21 points. At that point, you roll with the guy who could get you that number of points in a hurry and that's Denard.
Let Denard grow up. He has started 6 games.
Reasonable forum posts? Can I haz rational thoughts and opinions? No? Ok, I'll quit reading.
Seriously, can this idea not go any further than this post tonight? Denard is our best chance to win. Period.
I wondered also what would have happened if Tate came in for only 1 series late in the game. It seems like MSU prepared well for Denard, but how well did they prepare for Tate? Maybe a change in qb for a series would have kept MSU's D off balance a little bit. And it would keep future defenses from only preparing for Denard if they think Tate could come out at any time. Sure Denard is the starter no question, just trying to throw the defense off a little.
I know Michigan scored on the drive where you had three consecutive passes dropped. Didn't you score on every drive there was a dropped pass?
I think so - I remember Roundtree dropping one on our first TD drive. I don't remember any others.
Why is this being discussed
Passed through my head in the first quarter, not long after the interception. For some reason, and I am rather certain, Denard was not moving quite as quickly today. He was not running with confidence, particularly the first three steps. The Dink/Donk passing attack, which was largely working due to the coverage, is Tate's forte.
What I really wanted to see: Denard lining up at WR, Tate at QB.
Or: Denard/Tate sprinting on and off of the field.
My god, we're the worst fan base ever. Denard has done everything up to this point, and the passes he threw today are nothing new, he's always thrown to where the receiver is at and not to where they're going. We've lived on Denard to this point, and we're going to die with him too, let him grow and figure it out. He's only a sophomore, and he had terrible coaching in HS, give him time. Maybe Tate completes those passes against that coverage, but they wouldn't be in that coverage if Denard wasn't on the field.
What did Adidas do with Nebraska's jerseys?
You know, I'm not really sure. But when I was watching the Thursday night game, their away jerseys didn't have that odd stretched across the torso and loose sleeves look that gives us some ridiculous looking away jerseys. The only way to really illustrate it is this comparision. Our jerseys have never looked right to me since 2008.
That does look bad. Maybe we're wearing a different brand of pads or something.
I definitely want to get rid of the stripes running up the sides of the road uniform. Those do not look good, especially from the back.
Still a Heisman candidate. Even #16 is human. Fuck off troll
Never thought about Tate needing to come in. There were plenty of well thrown balls that should have been caught that whether it was Denard, Tate, or Jack Kennedy throwing them, they would have still been dropped because of the receiver.
The first pick was ugly. No excuse for that. Overthrowing Stonum looked to be duel responsibility. Denard got too excited, and for some stupid reason Stonum pulled up on the route. Really Stonum??
The other red zone pick was a tough throw that probably shouldn't have been made, but any QB is going to assume they can make it. Good defensive play more than errant throw.
The Grady pick is another example of dual responsibility. Yeah, Denard probably would want that back, but as much as I love Kelvin Grady - LOOK FOR THE DAMN BALL. I have no idea what happened with him on that play.
Denard did look a bit tentative, but early on, they were able to move at will with a good run/pass mix and using others in the backfield. However, when State was able to move up and down the field, it put too much pressure on the offense to keep up (i.e. pass it more).
Re: Tate - the last time he was meaningful playing time, he was confusing Buckeyes for Wolverines. So it's hard to say he would have done better. Besides, on any given play, Denard can take it to the house. You can't say that about Tate. Even if they lose to Iowa next week, they come back with Penn State, Illinois, and Purdue - all three are very winnable games. That would make them 8-2 heading into Wisconsin and OSU.
I just knew this post was coming after the game. Let's all back up from the ledge, Shoelace will bounce back and put up numbers against Iowa.
He's the best QB we have. Yes, he forced a couple of passes. Try to remember that 1. State had the best Defense he faced this year and 2. He practices against a defense that ranks 120 out of 120 on passing yards allowed in the FBS, so he isn't used to throwing into tight coverage.
I got neg'd a couple weeks back for questioning if Denard was actually a better QB for this team than Tate. So be it. These last two games haven't helped Denard's case much.
Even given Shoelace's other-worldly running ability, Tate running this O could still be more difficult to defend. RR seems to have a preference for a running QB that can pass over a passing QB that can run but I'm not sure that preference would bear out under a head-to-head test against a good Big Ten defence.
I'd really like to see the two of them split time against Iowa so we could get a better idea which QB can put more points on the board!
These last two games haven't helped Denard's case? Yes, that 200/200 game against IU was a real bummer.
The main knock everyone has about Denard's game is that he screwed up in the redzone. Gee, that never happened to Tate, now did it?
comparing a Freshman Tate to a Sophomore Denard, not exactly fair. Tate was also coming in for Heisman praise exactly 1 year ago before the State game and Michigan was also 5-0 then too.
The whole "Tate was a Heisman candidate" stuff is getting tiresome. One or two guys half-jokingly mentioned him as a sleeper last year. Not the same. Denard was the clear favorite going into Saturday.
And yeah, Tate might be better, but he didn't really show me anything new against BGSU. He still bailed on the pocket very early, which IMO was his biggest problem last year.
I think that people are mislead that Denard's amazing personal statistics have done absolutely nothing for Michigan that Tate hasn't done so far. Only time will tell, but I think Tate as the poor man's Pat White and Denard as pseudo-Slaton is a better talent combination than Denard as Pat White and *insert 2-yard back here*. But what do I know?
I never knew individual stats led to victories.