Threet is gone [CONFIRMED]
per a poster on the Scout free board http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=162&f=2019&t=3944669
Heard it on channel 4 news, apparently.
Good luck Threet, if true.
EDIT: there are still no solid sources on this, so I'm not going to say it's all over, yet.
EDIT 2: Note that the thread was pulled from Scout. Beaver made a post saying it is still not final but we should hear tomorrow. Sounds like he's gone, but nothing is done yet.
EDIT 3: Per Michigan Daily, he is releasing a statement tomorrow.
http://www.michigandaily.com/content/2009-02-16/michigan-quarterback-st…
I can't imagine that he is releasing a statement that he is sticking around. I'm pretty sure this is the end.
FINAL EDIT: He is gone, confirmed by Detroit News.
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090215/SPORTS0201/9…
February 15th, 2009 at 6:55 PM ^
Maybe this means Tate has been so good he scared Threet away? (I'm half-joking, but I'm looking for a silver lining here).
February 15th, 2009 at 7:48 PM ^
Thats funny.. But could be true lol.
February 15th, 2009 at 8:48 PM ^
We went 3-9 last year and Threet's play was a big reason why. I don't see why anyone would lose sleep if he transferred. Yes, he is better than Sheridan, but we might as well get our future started with T-Force or D-Rob.
February 15th, 2009 at 10:44 PM ^
Yeah, his play was a huge factor. Sheridan's had nothing to do with it. Neither did the shitty O-Line that gave him little time and couldn't run block. The piss poor sheme's, execution and overall level of play by the defense didn't hurt much. The ungodly number of fumbles and the shitty special teams play also weren't huge factors.
Of all the reasons that UM went 3-9, Threet not playing well (while he was hurt) was way down on the list. I would take a guy like Threet next year over a true frosh. Look at how 'well' Pryor did with 2x the talent and being an overall better player than our two frosh QB's. Next year will be a huge struggle without Threet.
February 16th, 2009 at 12:35 AM ^
Threet has some talent...but his arm was VERY erratic all year... he is a tough kid and tried hard...but let's not completely absolve him from a) the 100 yd dumb pick 6 vs. Toledo which lost the game. b) multiple overthrows all year long to wide open guys, including the heart breaking pick overthow vs. NW.
A decent QB would have gotten Michigan 3-4 more wins last year easily...and it wasnt all on the line...they had a lot of time to throw.
That having been said, we all wish Steve Threet well. He has some potential.
February 16th, 2009 at 6:11 PM ^
threet transfering has zero effect on the michigan football teams chances this year.
next.
February 15th, 2009 at 6:57 PM ^
No one seems to be refuting it, but no one is really backing up the poster either. You would think this would have hit Scout and Rivals' main page...
February 15th, 2009 at 7:07 PM ^
This would probably be a bad time for those of us who believed from the outset that Forcier would start from the outset next year and were ridiculed for saying so to say that we were right, wouldn't it?
February 15th, 2009 at 7:08 PM ^
Why must you make everyone transfer, Angry Michigan Quarterback Hating God!?
Mallett, the elder Forcier and now Threet?
Any of these three could really have helped the transition into the full-fledged zone read spread offense. Yea, Forcier would be best of the bunch, but this transfer means last year was a completely wasted year in terms of getting the most important player on the offense some game experience.
It's hard to make any argument that Threet transferring could be a good thing...
Let's hope that all of this training Forcier has been getting his whole life results in good things
February 15th, 2009 at 7:25 PM ^
"Any of these three could really have helped the transition into the full-fledged zone read spread offense"
You must have missed the part where Threet tried to help us transition into the full-fledged zone read spread offense and didn't do so well.
That said, I would have expected him to be dramatically improved over last year.
February 15th, 2009 at 9:32 PM ^
what are you a buckeye fan? You must be to be that idiotic. Threet tried and failed, J. Forcier left berfore RR went there and helped RR to get Tate and Mallet hated it at UM. He grew up a Razorback fan and always wanted to play for Arkansas. The only reason he did not go to AR in the first place was because Mitch Mustain had gone there one year prior and Houston Nutt told him Mustain was going to be his man. Mallet did not want to ride the bench for 3 years and then have only one year to prove himself to the scouts. After Mustain and Nutt left AR, RR came to UM and told Mallet that he would have to learn to run the read option attack. He went to AR and is having to learn to run the spread under Petrino but this way he got an extra year to learn it. He is at the school that he always wanted to go to and will be a starter this year. Sounds like a pretty good scenario for the kid and I can't blame him. If Threet leaves I would hate to see it because it means that we are a 99% lock to have a true freshman start at QB but I think that was going to happen anyway. Threet if this is true I thank you for your contributions you made to the team and I am sorry it did not work out for you, Good luck where ever you go. That being said I hope Threet stays because no matter who the starter is we still need the depth at this position. GO BLUE!!!!!!!!
February 15th, 2009 at 7:15 PM ^
This makes the Robinson "get" even more crucial than it already was. I am hoping Gallon gets a nice score on his ACT, because he could end up at number three, all 5-7 of him, or at least fill the wildcat role.
As for it being "good," I was hoping Threet would never see the field this year. Maybe he has watched Forcier and has decided that it would be hopeless to compete against him. That would be really great.
I still think he should transfer home to Adrian College and get some PT; I was just hoping it wouldn't happen until next year. The best-case scenario for Threet was to be a "depth" player. Now, the "net" UM QB's are working with is considerably smaller.
February 15th, 2009 at 7:24 PM ^
But it also assures that Robinson MUST stay at QB, which is significant.
There was talk that he would move to corner if Forcier locked down the starting/backup QB slot. Now, the team does not have that luxury. Robinson must be the buffer between Forcier and Sheridan.
Of course, that's IF it's true that Threet is transferring.
February 15th, 2009 at 9:56 PM ^
In an offense built around a running quarterback. Our "wildcat" so to speak, is the entire f'in offense.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:23 PM ^
As if they recruited "the most accurate passer in high school football" to be a "running quarterback....."
You need to watch some Wildcat plays and compare them to normal spread option plays.
You will see a lot less "reading" and a lot more running.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:33 PM ^
Perhaps you should reread the interview that TomVH did with Tate a few weeks ago. He specifically mentions that RR wants more yards on the ground from the QB position. The read option play is a huge part of his offense and is not going anywhere, which increases the chance of injuries to whomever is playing QB.
February 15th, 2009 at 7:16 PM ^
Not good. But is it true??? Where's Tom?
February 15th, 2009 at 7:31 PM ^
I bet Threet is more interested in being a full-time starter, than watching Tate or Denard surpass him in RichRod's offense. Now is the right time to bolt because other programs will fit his talents better and prepare him for a pro-style offense.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:24 PM ^
Like Adrian College?
February 15th, 2009 at 7:23 PM ^
So Sheridan is our only QB with experience now; man I was hoping Threet would help ease the transition, but looks like a true freshman will be starting in our first game. I don't know; this isn't good news. Reaching 7 wins this year has become alot harder.
February 15th, 2009 at 7:26 PM ^
This may hurt quite a bit. People are putting too much stock into Forcier. I remember when Stafford, who is leaving for the NFL after his junior year, was terribly inconsistent as a freshman. Forcier may be great down the road, but his lack of experience is going to bring a lot of deja vu moments from last year.
February 15th, 2009 at 7:30 PM ^
And I can remember when Chad Henne was pretty solid as a freshman.
One case either way doesn't mean anything to what Tate may or may not be capable of.
February 15th, 2009 at 7:33 PM ^
for Forcier to win the Heisman this year.
February 15th, 2009 at 7:37 PM ^
For every Chad Henne there are a thousand Matt Staffords and Jimmy Clausens. The success rate is not particularly high.
February 15th, 2009 at 10:07 PM ^
You ought to allow a man his illusions.
February 16th, 2009 at 12:05 AM ^
Clearly none of you specialized in reading comprehension, let's look again at what I originally said.
"One case either way doesn't mean anything to what Tate may or may not be capable of."
So, to sum up what is implied in that statement that all of you geniuses couldn't put together is that NONE, I repeat, NONE of the previous cases (Henne, Stafford, Clausen) mentioned have any effect on how Forcier plays, because he is his own man.
But go ahead, continue your ineptitude and thinking that because I said the name Chad Henne, I believe Tate is going to do awesome this year. Sheesh.
February 16th, 2009 at 10:22 AM ^
Lets see, your original post made a statement regarding Henne as a freshman, then said:
"one case either way doesn't mean anything to what Tate may or may not be capable of."
So then, what IS the point of your post? To have no point?
Then in your above reply, you expose yourself as having the very attitude that we inferred, that "Tate is going to be awesome this year." I.e., another Henne.
We read between the lines quite accurately.
February 16th, 2009 at 10:34 AM ^
What he's saying is that Henne is a case for freshman success, while Clausen is a statement against freshman success.
He's also saying that Tate is his own man, meaning his success is not tied to Henne's or Clausen's or anyone else's.
You read between the lines too much - he never said Tate was going to have a great year. He said that's what YOU interpreted his post to mean. Go back and read his previous post again.
February 16th, 2009 at 10:56 AM ^
And Tate is his own man, so they have no bearing on each other. Yeah, so? He (and now you) bring up players to say that they don't have anything to do with each other?
I did re-read his post. And he CONFIRMED OUR interpretation of what he said by his following statement that Tate is going to be awesome this year.
And it looks like our 3rd string QB just got promoted. That didn't take too long, now did it Magnus?
February 16th, 2009 at 11:26 AM ^
Here's what he said:
"But go ahead, continue your ineptitude and thinking that because I said the name Chad Henne, I believe Tate is going to do awesome this year."
Another way of saying the same thing: Go ahead and think that just because I said the name Chad Henne, I think Forcier will be great.
It's sarcasm, see? He's saying you're jumping to conclusions. He's calling you stupid.
Regarding your last point, what? You think if Beaver was our second QB in this class that Threet would have stayed? Is Denard Robinson - who's still in Florida and might become a cornerback - instilling such fear in Threet that he sees the need to bolt? This does nothing to further your argument against me. It just shows that even though you tell me to "get over it", you can't do the same thing. Hypocritical much?
February 16th, 2009 at 12:20 PM ^
I think he's saying that, if we hadn't lost our "third-string QB", we'd be in better shape now, because our top two QBs would both be four-star dual threat QBs who had enrolled early.
His words.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:39 PM ^
I'm not going to say there's no difference between Beaver and Robinson and their enrollment, but in the long run, I think Beaver's early enrollment would have been a negligible difference. Either way, our second QB in this class would be a true freshman in 2009.
February 16th, 2009 at 5:44 PM ^
context of the thread.
Re: reading comprehension, you do not seem to understand what I wrote in your two threads:
http://mgoblog.com/diaries/omg-we-lost-our-3rd-string-qb
http://mgoblog.com/content/omg-we-got-third-string-qb
Again, to sum, more quality recruits = better chance a quality QB takes the field. Particularly when considering the chances of injuries, transfers and players deemed ineligible.
With Threet, depth (particularly in light of the lack of experience at the position) was a major concern; it now is a critical issue.
People on this blog were understandably concerned when Beaver de-committed, and happy when Robinson committed. QB has been a position of great concern, and the more depth and quality players at the position, the better off the team. And, yeah, I fully expect Robinson to remain a QB. And, no, I don't think either Robinson or Beaver "scared off" Threet (and where did you get that from what I wrote?).
But shit does happen, and our "3rd string" QB you were seemingly so dismissive of, as a true freshman(!) is now only one player (another true freshman!) from being Michigan's starting QB. Let's hope that Robinson picks up the offense quickly.
Trying to have a cordial discussion with you is quite an experience.
February 16th, 2009 at 5:53 PM ^
"And it looks like our 3rd string QB just got promoted. That didn't take too long, now did it Magnus?"
You were trying to have a "cordial" conversation with me? Hm. It seemed to me like you were looking for an argument.
Let me break it down for you:
Since we got Denard Robinson, our three viable QB's would be Threet, Forcier, and Robinson. Threet transferred. We're left with Forcier and Robinson.
If Beaver had remained committed, our three viable QB's would be Threet, Forcier, and Beaver (Robinson probably would not have chosen Michigan). Threet probably still would have transferred. We'd be left with Forcier and Beaver.
So...other than Beaver enrolling early, what's the difference? I understand that "more players = more chances for success." That has nothing to do with the argument, since we'd either have two incoming freshmen...or two incoming freshmen.
By the way, I like how you totally skipped over the hypocritical nature of your previous post. Telling me to "let it go" and then trying to start up another discussion about it? Stay classy.
February 16th, 2009 at 6:52 PM ^
was going to pick up a suitable replacement. We were lucky to pick up Robinson at the last minute (your 2nd to last paragraph, we very well may have had only 1 incoming freshman QB). Beaver or Robinson, Threet's decision is likely the same. Without either, who knows? I suspect Threet leaves all the same.
That leaves the team with a true freshman backed up by Sheridan. Yeah, that "3rd string QB" is looking that much more important, and that's panic time.
Regarding the comment "And it looks like our 3rd string QB just got promoted. That didn't take too long, now did it Magnus?" Sorry, truth hurts sometimes. And yeah, as you pointed out, Robinson is still in Florida. Hasn't enrolled. And he is now our 2nd string QB as a true freshman. Kind of elevates his importance, don't you think?
Regarding the hypocritical "letting it go." Uh, no, what I wrote about regarding importance of the "3rd string QB" is, today, even more important and valid.
And if you are not willing to admit that, I'm fine with that. I hope that in the spirit of your comment "Very realistically, Beaver's decommitment [now Robinson's commitment] affects the 2013 season" is right on. But at the time, and now more so, I strongly suspect quite the opposite.
February 16th, 2009 at 7:03 PM ^
Part of the reason for my Diary was to say "Let's not panic. There's still time to get another QB." Guess what? We got another QB. So the panic was unnecessary.
The truth doesn't hurt. It's just the truth. I don't really care, because my post never said definitively that Beaver was our third string QB. You (and several others) refuse to see that through my entire post, I said "if" and "if" and "if." And that doesn't change the fact that you told me to let it go and then brought it up again.
I understand why you brought it up - to try to rub it in my face that I was wrong. That's fine. I stand by what I wrote. I would write it again if the situation arose (although I'd change the title of the post, since most people judged the post by the title instead of the actual content).
But if you think it's okay to bring it up that part of my post was wrong, then don't tell me to "let it go" when I point out that part of my post was correct. You won't even admit that such a statement is hypocritical. You've been dancing around it for the past couple comments.
Also, you've failed to acknowledge that your reading comprehension from the above posts was less than stellar. You posted a couple times about how anskyman (or whoever) was wrong, even though you blatantly misinterpreted his post. Then you said "I understand the conversation that took place" without admitting that your interpretation was inaccurate from the get-go.
So forgive me if I don't take your chiding to heart.
February 16th, 2009 at 6:04 PM ^
Magnus nailed it on the head, he can comprehend what he reads.
All I meant was I don't care what Henne or Jimmy Clausen did, they don't affect Tate whatsoever. He can be great, or he can be awful, the past doesn't matter no matter which side you fall on.
February 15th, 2009 at 7:38 PM ^
Henne was the exception to the rule. Can anyone name 3 other recent true freshmen QBs who had a solid first year? Hell, I can't even think of one. Hell, look what happened to LSU in '07; they returned their entire OL and most of their skill players, yet ineffective QB play decimated that team. Both of their QBs were first year starters with no experience (a redshirt freshman and a true freshman). LSU struggled to get to 7 wins, and they were more experienced on both sides of the ball than Michigan will be in the '08 season. I'd say we have quite a bit to worry about.
February 15th, 2009 at 7:42 PM ^
My point wasn't that he's going to be just like Henne because he wears the same colors, just that anything is possible, regardless of what the past says. He could suck horrifically, or he could be decent, I would prefer the latter I suppose though
February 15th, 2009 at 9:58 PM ^
That although anything is possible, it is much, much, MUCH, more likely he struggles as a true frosh.
February 15th, 2009 at 7:44 PM ^
I must have missed where Jake Long, Dave Baas, Braylon Edwards, Jason Avant and Steve Breaston were given another year of elibility to play for the '09 Michigan team. Stop with the freshman Henne/freshman Forcier comparisons. There are none. Even morons are laughing at that comparison.
February 15th, 2009 at 10:47 PM ^
and I laughed.
February 15th, 2009 at 8:14 PM ^
Chad Henne had Braylon Edwards to bail him out when he made a bad decision (and when I say bail out, I mean reach around the defender and take the ball out of said-defenders hand).
This is not meant to be a knock on Chad Henne. I still think that he was beyond excellent as a freshman QB. But even though he defied expectations and proved to be a great QB, he still made poor decisions.
February 15th, 2009 at 8:22 PM ^
I remember Doug Karsch commenting on how former OC Terry Malone was coaching Henne to just throw the ball up in the general vicinity where Braylon was and not worry too much about trying to "thread the needle." It made it a helluva lot easier for Henne to have success. There is no Braylon Edwards on the '09 Wolverines football team.
February 15th, 2009 at 7:32 PM ^
Inconsistent would be a step up from last year. Our QB play last year was consistently horrible.
February 15th, 2009 at 7:39 PM ^
I guess the question is do you think year two Threet would be worse than first year Forcier?
I dunno i'm glad that denard came though because that means we can run 80% of the time and probably still win some games.
February 15th, 2009 at 8:32 PM ^
The 2nd year Threet vs. first year Forcier argument is one of the most difficult questions I've tried to answer in recent memory...
February 15th, 2009 at 9:05 PM ^
me too.
February 15th, 2009 at 9:41 PM ^
...Threet, other than one game against ND and one half against Penn State being awful for most of the year.
Read this....
http://www.mgoblog.com/content/post-mortem-quarterback
And explain to me why we shouldn't get the freshmen as much playing time right away? It's better to just let Tate start, if Threet isn't going to be the guy.