There is legitimate hope this year.

Submitted by wolverine1987 on

So during last year's game against Notre Dame, I watched the game in a bar, which turned out to be one the the most fun experiences I've ever had, complete with hugging a 300 lb stranger who looked like Mark Henry the pro wrestler. Of course I also taped the game for future reference, and to clear up space on the DVR, I just finished watching the game for the second time straight through (I have watched many small segments as well). I have two observations from this experience.

First, that as my wife just mentioned "you're a loser" (she's a Purdue grad but accurately captured the moment and myself). I was almost as happy at the key plays as when they first took place. Second, Tate was REALLY impressive, especially for a true freshman in his second game. He showed great instincts, was relatively calm in the pocket, by and large made good decisions, and was accurate. It reminded me of why we were so excited after the first few games last year, and made me more hopeful for the offense this year. If Tate can recapture what he showed early, DR has really made the strides it seems, and the line improves as expected, the offense has the potential to be special. Nothing new here, but it was great to see Tate before injury, inexperience, and perhaps a blow to his confidence took his play down a few notches. If you haven't watched the game lately I recommend it. There is real hope this year.

BiSB

April 25th, 2010 at 2:20 PM ^

I don't know if the ND game can really be our source of inspiration. The rest of the year seemed proved that ND's defense was just really, really, really bad. Just terrible. Worse than ours. They got pushed around by Navy. And Stanford. And UConn. And Washington. And State. And ITT Tech. And Phoenix University.

I actually took more hope from the OSU game, where the defense played admirably (even competently), the offense moved the ball, and we would have had a shot if we could have HELD ONTO THE GODDAMN BALL.

Sven_Da_M

April 25th, 2010 at 3:02 PM ^

... but Denard is hard (to catch).

I may still be punch-drunk from the Spring Game kool-aid, but DR at QB is what could separate an OK year from a great year.

With two BIG ifs (that DR learns the offense and can throw decently) everything changes. If you look back to any tape on Pat White, you see how devastating RR's playbook is when it's opened up.

Pat White might have had a better arm, or perhaps a more accurate one. DR is clearly faster and perhaps even a more natural runner. He's also still in the early stages of the QB learning curve.

I think (hope?) that the decision has been made, and the comments of RR about competition or perhaps using both Tate and DR are to keep the Big 10 off balance as long as possible.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to see a Tate-DR combo in the early part of the schedule, with a more plain vanilla playbook. Assuming you can get by ND with it, you don't really start to let the read option fly until MSU on Oct 9.

And you basically show Little Brother a track meet with shoulder pads.

Dilithium, bitches, dilithium...

JC3

April 25th, 2010 at 3:05 PM ^

The playbook will be more opened up regardless who starts.. at this point I'd say Tate probably has the best grip on it.

The QB competition isn't over now, it won't be over until the fall or even until the season actually starts. The coaches have said they'll play as many QB's as they can... wouldn't be surprised if all three played by the start of Big 10 play.

Keeeeurt

April 25th, 2010 at 3:08 PM ^

Does anyone else thinks that we will multiple QBs this year depending on the defense we face. Poor run D = Denard starting and Poor Pass D = Tate starting. Is this possible or would cause the rest of the offense to stumble because of the constant switching at QB?

BiSB

April 25th, 2010 at 3:14 PM ^

they definitely both play. They will probably both take snaps in the majority of games.

That might be the best part of the advancement of Denard... the offense will have to change less when he replaces Tate (and/or vice versa). We can keep running the same stuff, but the defense will have to respond to a different threat. This will be unlike last year, where Denard coming in significantly changed the game plan, so any advantage it created by throwing the defense off-balance was negated by the fact that it threw the offense out of whack at the same time.

champswest

April 25th, 2010 at 7:00 PM ^

is the difference in style or how they can hurt the defense. Some teams use 2 QBs because they can't decide on which is better (MSU last year). I think that RR's offense thrives on (and maybe even requires) 2 or more quality QBs. If they are both proficient, he will use them both. It will make the defense prepare for the run, the run option and the scramble QB that can throw on the run. Think back 2 years ago when we couldn't do any of those things. This could really be fun.

Wendyk5

April 25th, 2010 at 3:26 PM ^

Since the quarterback is the lead role on the offense, and arguably the one that requires the biggest ego, what happens to confidence and motivation when the QB's have to share the role? Obviously, you want to be a team player, and do what's best for the team, but is it hard psychologically to share the #1 spot and does it ultimately affect his ability to take control of the team and lead?

TESOE

April 25th, 2010 at 6:00 PM ^

knowing how many split seconds a QB takes to make the pass or tuck and run, the zip on the ball, the cadence pre snap, the read pre snap...there are more meaningful intangibles than individual or team confidence and motivation wrt the QB.

I don't think either QB (or understudy du jour) is going to motivate the team more or less, other than taking the snap and serving a Huskie or two. It is better to give the majority of practice to the guy who you think is going to go. To that extent it would serve Mich better to make that call as early as possible. Up to this point, and through summer, competition is probably driving quality more than snaps with the 1's.

Fresh Meat

April 25th, 2010 at 3:27 PM ^

If you had to clear space on your DVR, erasing that game is a terrible mistake. I still have mine, and I have watched it at least 10 times on top of having been at the game as well. That was one of the most entertaining and fun times I have ever had at a game live of any sport. Excuse me while I go watch it again.

Ty Butterfield

April 25th, 2010 at 4:11 PM ^

I don't have a DVR, I am still going with a VCR. I taped the ND game and saved the tape. I have taken it out at least three times since the game happened and watched it. This thread makes me want to watch it again. I have a few Michigan games that I have taped over the years and saved because they were so great. The other day I was talking to a friend of mine about the NFL draft. He lives in Colorado and is a Broncos fan. He said he didn't understand why Denver drafted Tebow because they already picked up Brady Quinn in the off season. I told him if he thought that Brady Quinn was the answer I would happily send him a copy of the 2006 Michigan vs ND game that I have on tape. The Michigan defense OWNED Quinn and Quinn played like a school girl. That is another game I still watch from time to time because it was so awesome.

tk47

April 25th, 2010 at 4:01 PM ^

it's all going to come down to the defense this year, primarily the secondary. If we can't defend the pass any better than last year, we're screwed.

Muttley

April 25th, 2010 at 4:11 PM ^

and played the rest of the year hurt.

Tate exposed his shoulder on a 4th down play that did no good. It's been said that the hardest pass for a young QB to learn is the incomplete one when nothing's there. That was certainly true of Tate last year.

I don't think we know enough to make proclamations about next year's starter.

energyblue1

April 25th, 2010 at 4:23 PM ^

Offense Tate/Denard develope a deep ball, consistently...work every week on it....
RB's emerge....
Oline comes together...imo I still think Barnum and Q need to be in the starting oline.....

Defense, Fill that dline rotation...Oh how I hope Black/Ash can be apart of the dline rotation...Martin/Campbell/Vanbergen take it to olines and keep them off lbers!

DB's emerge in a big way.... Cannot be a liability like last yr.

BTW for those that did not notice, osu included te's bigtime this offseason in their offense, why...because teams that dominated michigan's defense last yr all worked te's for easy 1st downs and pts...(iowa, wisconson namely) So this offseason defending te's has to be a point of emphasis since osu and other teams made it a point on their teams

artds

April 25th, 2010 at 5:10 PM ^

There seems to be a lot of focus on the offensive side of the ball in this thread, and that's a natural point of emphasis in football, but offensive production is NOT the big question mark with this program right now.

Michigan's offense managed to score 354 points last year in only 12 games. We have recorded good W/L records many times in recent history scoring that many points. For example:

2007; 9-4; 354 points
2005; 7-5; 345 points
2002; 10-3; 361 points
2001; 8-4; 320 points
1999; 10-2; 361 points
1998; 10-3; 359 points

No, the big question mark has to do with the DEFENSE. The defense has allowed 347 points and 330 points in RRs first two years, again, both in just 12 games. Prior to 2008, Michigan had never even given up total points in the 300s before.

For the 6 seasons mentioned above, the average number of points scored against Michigan was 251 (all in 13 games, with the exception of the '99 season, which was only 12 games).

I hate to say it, but if Michigan can't get it together defensively, we're going to be toast again, no matter how well the spread offensive works.

And the departure of our 2 (possibly 3) most productive defensive players doesn't exactly offer us much hope that G-Rob is going to be able to improve the defense to a point that will allow us to compete in this conference.

BTW, all stats in this post are brought to you by http://michigan-football.com/ncaa/f/michigan.htm

artds

April 25th, 2010 at 5:47 PM ^

Sorry, not trying to be a downer or anything.

At least you can take from my numbers that Michigan's offense was actually pretty good last year, and should be very good this year as our returning players continue to improve.

But it's important for everyone to realize we're not still sitting around waiting for this spread thing to start working. It's already working.

It's the defense that is going to make or break this season.

energyblue1

April 25th, 2010 at 5:27 PM ^

2007 278ppg, 2006 was great till the last 2 games, 42, 38...., 2005 was 244 better then 2004 wich gave up 278.... point is slowly what we knew as dominating michigan defenses eroded to giving up 20ppg, some 24ppg.....and that team won a bigten title and went to the rosebowl......

Yes the defense has to get fixed in a big way, and I think it is. Huge improvement this yr from last and the following yr will see the defenses of old imo....

energyblue1

April 25th, 2010 at 5:50 PM ^

punkchewashon....... look up the last 6yrs of michigan defenses and points allowed. It will give you a clear trend on michigan defenses. Long before Rich arrived...

Carry on with thou police work, and whilst thou art in thy endeavor, could thou police gramma 2

Fencer Tingbot

April 25th, 2010 at 5:57 PM ^

Last year's Notre Dame game, no matter how both teams finished the season, was one for the ages. You can NOT deny that was one of the best games you have ever watched. Period. College football is all about games like that.

Now--to say there is hope for this year---and to negbang anyone who disagrees or voices concerns---I just wonder what people keep seeing in SPRING PRACTICE and in a CONTROLLED SCRIMMAGE that gives them these mega boners? And then, wonder why people question the ultimate greatness of Denard Robinson, all of which is based on a 41-yard TD run against Western Michigan and Michigan's second team defense?

And that's where civil discourse and honest debate have been trashed here and on other UM boards. Even to be cautious and to question anything means said poster will be drilled and neg-banged into oblivion and many young fillies will SCREEEEEEm for the "banhammer"--I just don't get it.

We have a sample size. UM has been hideous for two years now. The coaching staff has undergone a MAJOR paradigm shift defensively. This staff stands accused of violations. We are banking on a bunch of two and three stars who had the difficult choice of Michigan over Bowling Green or Wyoming.

I'll stop there. I guess hope springs eternal, and the only place to go is up. But Rodriguez, for whatever reason (and I'll never discount the horribly unprovoked attack on him from the SE Michigan MSM), faces a monumental uphill battle that will not, in the end, be overcome. He is doomed. He has been doomed from the start. It is not entirely his fault--but the writing is on the wall, boys and girls.