September 7th, 2009 at 9:58 AM ^
I think he will probably. It will be hard to beat out Tate with a year of experience under his belt. I could see him becoming the change of pace QB and having D-Rob move to slot or RB though.
September 7th, 2009 at 10:12 AM ^
You can say we have two quarterbacks with more experience and we will, but I don't see us ever having a shortage of qb's under Rich Rod again. Now that he's winning, I bet you'll see a whole bunch of hugely hyped qb's committing in the future. We might have another D Gardner come in 2011 or 2012.
September 7th, 2009 at 10:59 AM ^
Now that he's winningIt's amazing what one game winning streaks do for morale. But I have to agree, we'll have some more big name QBs commit as long as we can win, but I don't think we'll be getting 4*s and 5*s every year. We'll probably get a 2* or 3* here or there for extreme depth and Cone-like duties. EDIT: And I guess I'll throw in the occasional 2* "potential Pat White" prospect who most likely will be a bust.
September 7th, 2009 at 11:32 AM ^
didn't mean to sound like we just won 9 games, although I now am believing it to be a possibility. But I have a ton of confidence in Rich Rod's ability to sell the combination of Michigan and playing quarterback to players like Denard who get offered as secondary and receivers elsewhere. I'm curious to look at quarterbacks that Florida has brought in since Meyer.
September 7th, 2009 at 11:32 AM ^
Come on, be fair to the kid–can a 2* really be a bust?
September 7th, 2009 at 11:35 AM ^
Yeah, poor word choice, but I'm sure most 2* QBs, people will hype the hell out of them because they're still Michigan players, see some of the praise Feagin got.
September 7th, 2009 at 10:16 AM ^
So much could effect this...
Tate has a good season and DRob shows great improvement then I say he should redshirt.
Tate (please god NO) gets a bad injury then DG will be forced into playing early as starter or back up.
Tate looks good. D Rob knows he is going to be a back up then maybe the coaches ask him to become Michigans Percy Havin and he agrees. Which I think will be his best chance at a career in the NFL. Then DG becomes the back up. (This is my hope) Also BTW...I'd bet my house that you NEVER see DRob on Defense.
So I really think there are way to many varibles at this point to even guess.
September 7th, 2009 at 10:19 AM ^
Another variable, we don't know what Rich Rod is telling Gardner in the recruiting process. If I was Gardner, I would see two freshman QB's playing early and wonder how much PT I would get. Maybe Rich Rod is telling Gardner he will get some PT a la Tressel to Pryor, in which case he can't red shirt him no matter what.
September 7th, 2009 at 10:33 AM ^
Judging from what we've heard in the past, I'd imagine Rodriguez is telling him, "The competition is always open for every spot on the field. If you're playing better, you'll be playing." Doesn't seem like the kind of coach to promise playing time to anyone. Also, it would make a lot of sense for Gardner to redshirt, then have two years to be the starter after Tate and Denard left; that way, he'd be a starter as a junior/senior, and have a great chance to be successful.
Now, I don't think that'll necessarily happen. I think that Gardner is such a talent that he'll probably force them to put him on the field before then. But, hey, he doesn't have to be starting. Starting for four years, or even three years, isn't really the norm. If he started as a junior/senior, he'd have a great chance to show what he can do and (presumably) go to the NFL. VY only started for two years, I believe. Maybe even a little less.
September 7th, 2009 at 10:25 AM ^
I feel confident in saying RR is telling DG he will get an opportunity to compete for playing time. That is what RR always says. If DG is good enough as a true Frosh to play, he will play.
September 7th, 2009 at 10:38 AM ^
I agree with gordie below, but can we please wait for him to sign a LOI before we give him the starting role.
September 7th, 2009 at 10:44 AM ^
hope he redshirts. there's no reason to want to be constantly playing true freshman, especially at the quarterback position
September 7th, 2009 at 10:57 AM ^
In principle. You'd like to (as mentioned in another thread) have the stability in your program that you have starters replaced with seasoned guys who have been in the system for at least one year. When UM was known as Quarterback U, that's kind of how it was done.
September 7th, 2009 at 10:48 AM ^
I hope he leads us to an undefeated season, national championship, and wins the Heisman as a true freshman.
But I'll happily watch him redshirt while Tate and DR hold down the QB-ing for the next few years.
September 7th, 2009 at 10:49 AM ^
The only thing worse than playing a true freshman at QB is playing a non-freshman who isn't capable, thankfully those days appear to be over.
September 7th, 2009 at 11:33 AM ^
There is a reason why starting QBs as freshman is a rarity. Starting freshman QBs is something you only do out of necessity, even if they are really really good. You do it only when you have no other option.
Barring some implosion of Tate as the QB we saw Saturday, DG should indeed redshirt. Denard, as he progresses, will complement Tate and offer most, if not all, the dimensions that Devin would add.
QB, more than any other position needs time to learn the whole playbook, practice receiver progressions, establish timing with the receiving core, and much, much more.
DG should not be upset at a redshirt, he should look at it as an opportunity to take a year to hone his skills and to fit them within the system.
Having a great QB on the field and one in the chamber is an ideal situation for everyone involved, so I wouldn't imagine that RR would rush Gardner onto the field if he didn't have to and that would mean that both Tate
Best case scenario:
-Tate continues to be Tate and improves steadily on what we saw against WMU
-Denard progresses as he learns the offense and fills out his passing game more
-Tate and Robinson start/alternate for this year and next giving defenses fits in preparation and on the field
-Gardner redhsirts and learns the system and gets acquainted with Mr. Barwis.
In two years, sophomore Garder starts to see game duty as a third option to juniors Tate and Denard.
Here is where it gets sticky, a junior DG could push Tate, Robinson or both for a starting position. While that is not ideal for the players themselves, as they all want to play, it is ideal for the team. We might well have a VERY quality problem on our hands in a few years with an embarrassment of riches at the QB slot. Who knows, even Munchie or another recruit-still-to-be-named might factor, which would be even better.
September 7th, 2009 at 12:21 PM ^
If DG redshirted he'd be a RS Soph when Tate/Denard are Seniors.
You said "a junior DG could push Tate, Robinson..."
I know that RichRod has said, "The best player will play" but I think if Tate/Denard are seniors, and have been starting for 4 years, they should get the start regardless of play and have the job until they lose it. By "they" I mean probably mostly Forcier.
September 7th, 2009 at 12:45 PM ^
player( ran a 4.3 forty) and one that had several try outs for the NFL. He once told me that getting that redshirt can mean the difference of making it in the NFL and not making it. He stated that the extra time that you get in college to train, learn the game and develop skills at your position can make it or break it for the NFL Scouts. He also said that most players never think of this when they enter college.
September 7th, 2009 at 1:08 PM ^
I demand video evidence of this "4.3 40" your friend claims to have run.
September 7th, 2009 at 1:12 PM ^
Yes, he is going to redshirt just for depth purposes. Instead of one year between TF and DR, there will be 2.
September 7th, 2009 at 1:26 PM ^
It will give DG time to develop and learn the offense. Also, very few freshman are as prepared to play as Tate.
September 7th, 2009 at 4:38 PM ^
Unless something happens to Forcier or Robinson (injury, ineligibility, transfer, whatever), Gardner will most likely redshirt as a frosh.
September 7th, 2009 at 4:47 PM ^
There is no reason why he shouldnt be redshirting next year. I have said it multiple times, at best he will be in on a trick play or 2 next year, a 5th year of eligibilty is faaaaaaaar more valuable.
September 7th, 2009 at 5:18 PM ^
They're not going to risk burning his redshirt on a trick play or two. That's just silly.