Which QB Do You Think Should Start?
I know someone already kind of asked this in the thread http://mgoblog.com/content/2010-quarterback-derby-you-make-call#comments but there were only a couple comments where people actually said who they wanted to start. Well now im asking, straight up. Who do you think should start. I know its early and the spring videos cannot be taken seriously because Denard played against the second team D, yada yada yada. Who do you think should start the season, based off everything you know, think, have seen, and have heard.
I tend to think that this situation will be one where we will be asking each and every week who will get the starting snap for the next game. That week's depth chart will probably state that the starter is Denard Robinson or Tate Forcier. I think that unless someone comes out and absolutely dominates fall practices, we will see a situation of rotating QBs based upon situation. Going against a weak pass defenses will probably see Tate play some more, but going against a poor run defense, will probably see Denard play more snaps. And yes I know that there are packages where both of them will be on the field at the same time, and I presume that there are some plays where we could see them both in the backfield at the same time as well.
Whichever one RR is willing to bet his future as the coach as the Michigan Wolverines upon. Him and the staff will know far better than us.
*twitch*
All three will start and we will have a 3 QB formation between Tate, Denard, and Devin.
Whatever happened to that Antonio Bass?
from Alro. That's what.
I mean, I love Drew Henson's potential, but I just think Tom Brady can get it done this year.
Love,
1999
Yeah right, '99... we all know Brady will be washed up and holding a clipboard in the CFL by the time Henson goes #1 overall after finishing a stellar senior season at Michigan.
Hrmph.
Denard looked quite awful last year dropping back to throw. His improvements in the spring have been stated frequently but I am not sure it's enough. How much can one really improve over the spring in this area? Sure he's more of a threat with his feet. No brainer there. Tate is still more well rounded and should get the nod originally. Hopefully Denard gets in some of the non-conf games. I still agree with the wide-spoken theory that says if you have 2 prospective qb's, you don't really have 1 good one.
Normally you won't see a QB improve all that dramatically over a year as a college passer. But most college QB's are good HS passers, who actually play in some sort of passing HS offense. DROB ran a under center wishbone type triple option, he really had no experince reading a D and throwing anything that resembled traditional routes. Coming from the system he did in HS and having no real QB coaching in HS it's very plausable we could see tremendous improvment over the span of a year from him. RR was lucky enough to be able to RS Pat White as a freshman, I would bet during that RS year in practice Pat White looked awfull passing the ball.
Unless one or the other regresses badly or makes mind-boggling leaps in fall practice, I think both TF and DR are going to see so much PT that who the starter is will have mainly symbolic importance.
A lot of people keep trying to blame Tate's injury on the fact he's not as big as Daunte Culpepper, and seem to imply that DR is much bigger and therefore less "vulnerable." I was no more than six feet away from DR on the street last week, and anybody who thinks Denard is some big strapping hulk in comparison to Tate is fooling themselves. DR is much faster afoot and a bit taller than Tate, but he's not wider or bulkier. Before we confidently proclaim that DR is indestructible, let's see him get as many snaps as TF got last year.
Right, Denard is not the size of McNabb, but he's clearly got more muscle mass than Tate does. If the two were going to run the Oklahoma drill on each other, I'd put money on Denard winning it.
Not Bornstein. If we lose to Algeria, then just dammit.
I was going to make some snarky comment about yet another Denard v. Tate post, but in defense to the OP, what the hell else are we going to talk about in the middle of June. So, thanks for guving us something to chat about, I guess.
My opinion: Denard will emerge as the nominal starter, but that the PT split will be close to 50-50, and may vary over any game depending on who we are playing or how each QB is playing in a particular game.
Of the two, it seems like he has the higher ceiling - with his speed and arm strength, if he can improve his accuracy, learn the full playbook and make smart reads, there is no reason that he cannot develop into Pat White 2.0. As for Tate, pre-injury, his accuracy was really impressive, but his size puts him in constant risk of decapitation on every play. That said, there is certainly precedent for smaller, quick-ish QBs that can create on the run to end up having very successful careers (think Drew Tate, Doug Flutie).
I think you mean mind-bottling leaps.
I think tate will start but you will see both take equal amount of snaps during the game. The coaches probably won't know who the actual starter will be until midseason. I think what you saw during the spring game, were the coaches building up denard's confidence by having him go against the 2nd string.
The one that does not turn the ball over.
Denard is going to absorb a lot fewer hits than Tate simply because its very difficult to drill a rocket in motion.
Denard is going to absorb a lot fewer hits than Tate simply because its very difficult to drill a rocket in motion.
Nonsense.
Obvious answer is "whoever gives us the best chance to win". For some reason, I hope that is Denard. I can put up with the occaisonal turnover for WMU-like runs, and Spring-Ball-to-Roundtree-like passes.
Defense has to stay honest when they know he can throw the ball. I think, day one, he should get the first chance.
If it shakes out that he can't throw the ball that well (aka Spring Game c*** tease), then we go with Tate. But either way I think you'll see both of them in the first ~6 games of the season.
I'm starting to like Denard more and more everyday as a player and as a representative of the university. The kid's shown a ton of maturity and resolve through the ~12 months he's been in AA. It was clear that he was a god-awful passer last year, but he was persistent and stuck with it. If the 2 QBs are neck-and-neck come Sept. 4th, I want Denard to get the nod. He just seems like a really terrific kid.
Like everyone, I want which ever QB gives us the better chance, but I'll play your little game and say Denard. Based on UConn's tendency to be shredded by fast QB's, Denard just seems like a good choice if I absolutely must choose one now.
I expect to Tate to start the first series then Denard will come in for the second series. In that game, the QB with the most effective series will probably get the majority of the snaps. I suspect Denard will be more effective because of his running abilities and UConn's issues therein.
Please dear God, not another year that our QB has either NO or virtually NO playing experience in college.
Denard played a decent amount, has a full year with the playbook, and will only pass Tate if the coaches feel he will do better. I really don't understand this terror of Denard passing Tate. It's not like the coaches will just say screw it and put in the worse player.
I didn't read through every comment, so neg me if this has already been said - some of this might not depend on who runs the "offense" better, but who better runs the best offense to beat UConn. Like all teams, our gameplan will change slightly depending on what team we play, and what QB we start might play in to that.
UConn will have a defense pretty similar to ours - pretty average, with the weakest link being their secondary. This may behoove us to throw more than we do against other teams, which might suggest that Tate gets the start. If DR is just looking much better in camp, this won't be enough to change RR's mind, but this certainly works in Tate's favor, I'd have to imagine.