Where is Devin Gardner
I am trying to figure out why we didnt see Gardner until he got some meaningless snaps at the end of the game. I thought after the 3rd quarter when we had the game in hand we would see Gardner for the 4th quarter or Denard would stop running the ball and go under center and the actual running backs would try to get going. We didnt see any of that. Any suggestions?
Edit: Thanks to those of you with insightful answers to the question and didnt neg vote me for asking a serious question. The snarks on here just cant resist a neg vote I guess. The whole voting by people who think they know everything is why I hardly read this blog anymore. It ruins it for the rest of us who want to have a serious conversation. Thanks
September 19th, 2011 at 11:34 AM ^
Hoke and Co. didn't feel comfortable enough with lead/situation to put in Gardner.
September 19th, 2011 at 11:36 AM ^
that he didn't feel comfortable with the game's outcome yet, so he opted to keep Denard in.
EDIT: BEATEN TO THE PUNCH
September 19th, 2011 at 11:37 AM ^
Maybe they thought it wasn't necessary to give DG minutes when their starting qb has looked uncomfortable in the offense, and needed more in game reps...remember that Western 4th quarter...neither do I
September 19th, 2011 at 11:59 AM ^
September 19th, 2011 at 12:49 PM ^
I was surprised how many hard hits he was taking throughout. EMU deserves some credit for delivering the punishment, because I was cringing many times at the shots Denard took. At 28-3, with EMU showing no ability to pass the ball downfield, I'm not sure I buy the explanation that the game wasn't in hand. I would have been willing to believe we needed to see him get into a rythym running plays out of the I, but then why zone-read and QB iso your way down the field. I grumbled aloud on that last drive. "Harumph", I said. "Get the Franchise off the field, please," I wailed.
September 19th, 2011 at 8:23 PM ^
Is Denard Robinson a football player or a china doll? Sometimes fans and media have a tendency to think players need more "protection" than the players themselves think they need. I would be willing to bet that Denard would be happy to play every down on both sides of the ball if he was asked.
September 19th, 2011 at 12:53 PM ^
Yes, Denard's last series is really the first questionable call I've seen from the coaching staff. I could understand having Denard close out the game passing since he clearly needs work on timing. Closing out on QB runs though, no thank you.
September 19th, 2011 at 3:49 PM ^
before the half in both the Western and the Notre Dame game. Perhaps we just needed to get into the locker room and make adjustments. It is early in the season. But I felt we needed to be aggressive at that stage in both of those games (particularly the Notre Dame game).
I can see that Borges is experimenting, and tweaking, and trying to find the right way forward headed down the stretch. But, given the stark reality of the way forward, and if Denard's arm really is a little banged up (which it looked like it was in the ND game), then some reps for Gardner once we were out past the 20 might have been a good investment for later in the season.
September 19th, 2011 at 7:47 PM ^
I like this perspective, no better time to work out the kinks than with the game in hand, especially since there are some kinks that really need to be worked out.
September 19th, 2011 at 7:52 PM ^
Was is against Wisconsin that RR punted last year with like eight seconds left in the half? That was maybe the one game management decision of his I could point to that I absolutely hated. Especially given that we were down big.
September 19th, 2011 at 11:37 AM ^
It looked like they didn't want to put him in a bad situation on the goal line.... and then that HUGE drive in the 4th killed the clock.....
also, if you think about it, Denard doesn't really have that many snaps, and they want to get him some more experience!
September 19th, 2011 at 11:38 AM ^
I was fine with it. The offense needs more game experience before they face some real opponents. Denard was extremely rusty and needs to get more comfortable throwing the ball. Now, why Denard ran 25 times against EMU is a whole other issue, and I am equally clueless as why they risked an injury to him in the late fourth quarter. We all know he can take a shotgun snap and run with ball...
September 19th, 2011 at 11:38 AM ^
but Denard and the offense still are not clicking. With the offense really not responding till the 2nd/3rd quarter, with half the offense installed, with no clear defined running game..and Hoke's philosphy of "game not over till zeros on the board" equals not so much playing time for Devin at this point. I don't think it will get better as we hit the Big Ten portion of the schedule. Hang in there Devin...
September 19th, 2011 at 11:39 AM ^
probably in class at the moment.
September 19th, 2011 at 11:43 AM ^
Almost noon, might be getting lunch pretty soon?
September 19th, 2011 at 11:39 AM ^
My guess is DG is in AA right now. I saw him there Saturday.
September 19th, 2011 at 11:42 AM ^
I thought the announcers were calling for Gardner to come in too soon. I mean, it seemed to me also the game was in hand, but certainly weirder things have happened. It'd be all the more likely given the defense, even though they did obviously improve as the game went on (again). I'm glad they wanted to avoid even a hint of a comeback.
Also, I don't want to hijack this thread, and I don't have enough points to post my own, so if someone is interested in commenting on the following, please make a new thread. But who's most affected by the rise of new powers in Florida? Just reading about how FIU has been steadily rising the last couple years, and of course there's UCF and USF in recent years. I know they're nowhere near being powerhouse programs, but they certainly are grabbing a lot of good talent still. Think this is (or will) significantly affecting State and other programs on a lower tier who recruit at least somewhat nationally?
September 19th, 2011 at 11:41 AM ^
September 19th, 2011 at 11:44 AM ^
Damn, I was hoping this thread was going to be a Devin Gardner version of "Where's Waldo", I was ready to start searching through some pictures.
September 19th, 2011 at 11:47 AM ^
I can't link to this obviously, but a big time insider on TheWolverine hinted that the coaching staff is not particularly happy with Gardner as the backup. Said he wouldn't be surprised if Devin never took a meaningul snap at UofM.
Dismiss it if you wish, but this is a guy with years of established credibility who is almost never wrong.
September 19th, 2011 at 11:52 AM ^
If that was the case then they would have given the snaps to Bellomy instead of Gardner. I've heard the exact opposite of what you are saying from sources I deem more credible than a guy on a message board.
September 19th, 2011 at 11:59 AM ^
Not neccisarily. That may mean that Devin is farther ahead of Bellomy at this point, but they still don't expect him to be a big time part of the future.
Just passing along what I heard. And it is not some random guy on a message board, it is THE insider on the TheWolverine. A guy whose track record when it comes to these kind of things is near perfect over the last 10 years.
Thought it was worth adding to the discussion, for people to do with it what they choose.
September 19th, 2011 at 12:03 PM ^
The coaches said a lot of positive things about Devin during fall camp. I have a hard time believing that he could fall out of favor that fast.
September 19th, 2011 at 12:20 PM ^
September 19th, 2011 at 12:26 PM ^
Short explanation: Denards needs as many snaps as possible. Long explanation: Your insider is a donkey who Lewan is going to hurt. Devin has looked his age when he has seen the field, he is a true sophomore/redshirt frosh if he gets his medical, just because he is not playing is not the end of the world.
September 19th, 2011 at 12:01 PM ^
That's a silly statement by whomever that person is. Obviously, it would be nice to NOT see Denard get hurt, forcing him to leave the game for a period of time, but this is the backup QB. For 2011 the coaching staff HAS to be happy to have Devin as the backup. The guy can speculate all he wants, but he loses creditibilty from me.
September 19th, 2011 at 11:51 AM ^
September 19th, 2011 at 11:48 AM ^
Perhaps the coaches won't admit it, but I'm on the side that thinks they are having problems executing Borges' offense and Denard needs as many snaps as he can get.
September 19th, 2011 at 11:51 AM ^
Do you think we were executing on the plan offensively, or was Denard creating his own offense again? I think it was Denard getting creative myself.
Play the role of offensive coordinator for Michigan. Are you comfortable with the ability of your team to move the ball if Denard isn't doing what he is doing? They were working on play execution on a defense that allowed us an opportunity to practice.
Devin Gardner will get his day in the sun.
Go Blue!
September 19th, 2011 at 11:51 AM ^
Denard hasn't exactly been playing well and needs some more live reps with the playbook.
Just saying.
September 19th, 2011 at 12:05 PM ^
I don't know what's more painful, watching DRob throw the ball over 10 yards or a shot to the nuts.
September 19th, 2011 at 1:01 PM ^
Oh come on, that's going way too far. Denard's been super inconsistent, and some throws have been ugly, but he's also had a few perfect 20 yard out throws and has hit his receivers in stride down the field a number of times. When he sets his feet properly he can make any throw on the field.
September 20th, 2011 at 12:18 AM ^
Denard needs as many game-time reads as possible - his attempts to thread the needle and other passing decisions haven't improved since last year, imo. Of course I may be flamed, but Denard's passing judgment is concerning.
September 19th, 2011 at 1:29 PM ^
watching Braxton Miller and Joe Bauserman try to quarterback a team!
September 19th, 2011 at 2:29 PM ^
Really? I found their performance against Miami quite comforting.
September 19th, 2011 at 3:17 PM ^
Guess you missed the one to Gallon with 23 secs left in the ND game...no pain there
September 19th, 2011 at 11:53 AM ^
I was okay with leaving Denard in as long as they did. The only thing that bothered me was him running and taking hits, though in hindsight I'm wondering if he may have audibled into any of those late QB draws. He should have been on a pass/handoff only rule in Q4.
September 19th, 2011 at 11:59 AM ^
Maybe Hoke is trying to keep his redshirt in tact......
September 19th, 2011 at 12:07 PM ^
Hoke hates red shirts, why would he want to keep one by using tact?
September 19th, 2011 at 12:00 PM ^
Everything I was going to say has already been said. So I'm just going to neg you. Unnecessary fear-mongering is unnecessary.
September 19th, 2011 at 12:01 PM ^
If you leave the starters in, you're not getting enough time for the reserves. If you pull them, you're letting your foot off the gas pedal, and not showing enough killer instinct. If you leave Denard in, you're not getting your back-ups ready in tak over. If you put Devin in, you're not getting your starters ready to, you know, win games later in the year.
I'm getting the impression people like to be miserable.
September 19th, 2011 at 12:08 PM ^
September 19th, 2011 at 12:17 PM ^
The offense should be tailored to Denard, do what he does best, over and over, don't try other things, like passing, because he's not good at it, and lets never see the I-formation again....people on this site should be the last complaining that they got exactly what they wanted. Even with all dangers that go with it.
September 19th, 2011 at 12:22 PM ^
It should. However, Borges has made it clear that Denard needs to be able to expand his skillset from last year. If you're going to have him play garbage time, have him practice something he isn't good at. The game was clearly in hand, Denard didn't need to do any of that running to win, and could have ended up hurt and out for a season.
September 19th, 2011 at 12:37 PM ^
Keeping Denard in the gun a large portion of the time isn't the same (and I actually think the distinction is silly and would just as soon see him under center if he is still effective) as having him run it 26 times against Eastern. With Hoke and Brandon going on and on all offseason about how the offense can't depend on one guy and how they need to protect the QB (implying the last guy was an idiot for letting his best player carry the ball) and then to see zero involvement from the running backs (by design) against ND and Denard getting tackled 20+ times against a cupcake opponent (with many of those hits coming with the game in hand and despite the fact that the backs averaged over 7 yards per carry) is definitely frustrating, and should be for everybody.
September 19th, 2011 at 2:13 PM ^
I imagine Hoke and Brandon presumed in the offseason that Denard would be able to hit a short to mid-range pass, eliminating the need to run 26 times. Until he does that, he'll keep running.
September 19th, 2011 at 8:11 PM ^
Perhaps they imagined he would be able to drop back, go through progressions, pay attention to his footwork, hit precise routes and establish command of a new passing scheme., despite never showing in his past that he could do so. If so they've been proven wrong, at least for the moment. However, Denard already demonstrated that he could hit short to medium range passes--it was called last year. With a tweaked passing scheme that takes advantage of what he can do fairly well, he will pass better. Lastly, some of his runs had nothing to do with passing or not passing, they easily could have gone to RB's but did not.
September 19th, 2011 at 6:30 PM ^
Maybe this was practice for Borges and Hoke, so they could work on the option schemes?
September 19th, 2011 at 12:21 PM ^
How are we getting gateway timeouts on a post Eastern Monday morning before Brian even has a post up?
The ads seems to be loading fast and furiously enough.
September 19th, 2011 at 12:45 PM ^
EVERYTHING IS TERRIBLE
So, sit rep normal on the Internet.......