Borges Conference Video Up

Submitted by Gameboy on October 15th, 2013 at 10:20 PM

If you can watch this without yelling and screaming at the screen the entire time, you are a better man than I.

What is amazing is that he talks about how you need to go away from the power game when it is not working. THEN WHY THE HECK DID YOU KEEP RUNNING IT IN OT!!!????




October 16th, 2013 at 10:10 AM ^

Not sure how this just occured to me, but...I know the coaches have obviously never used the term "Manball" but they have mentioned their end state being a West Coast type offense. Granted, I'm not a football expert, but when I think West Coast I think Walsh, Montana, Rodgers, using pass to set up the run, well-timed routes, etc. West Coast isn't usually associated with repeatedly slamming your forehead into a brick wall the whole game. So, I'm kind of confused at this point. What is our offensive identity supposed to be right now?


October 16th, 2013 at 10:47 AM ^

People saying ''It's hard to Al to want to throw because Devin throws picks sometimes'' did you watch the fucking game? You think because Devin threw 2 picks (which Hackenberg did as well, mind you) we should've run the ball up the middle into 9 guys 27 times? What are you smoking? Devin's arm and scrambling ability were what gave us the ability to even take a lead in that game. 


October 16th, 2013 at 11:01 AM ^

Believe me, I'm no Gardner worshipper, but he absolutely threw the ball well enough overall to win. His long td pass to Funchess in the second half was a thing of beauty, and Funchess dropped another catch in the end zone early on. If he drops back to throw more often, the scrambling lanes will open up and he'll get enough chances to cancel out the inevitable 1-2 interceptions he throws early on.


October 16th, 2013 at 11:58 AM ^

If Al is going to continue to be in denial that we cannot run the ball with what we have and Brady Hoke continues to allow him to call those plays...27 times...and does not step up and tell him to call something else, then it should fall on Brady.  Al is just like my 4 year old - he will continue to do whatever he wants until Brady puts him in a timeout.


October 16th, 2013 at 2:53 PM ^

Borges is taking a bunch of heat and rightfully so, but at the end of the day the buck stops with Hoke.  People have been clamoring for a year and half to throw short passes and keep the defense honest horizontally, not just vertically.  However, those short passes have never materialized in the offense.  If the readers of this blog can see it, then the coaches can too but they just refuse to take advantage of the defense when the db's line up 10yds off the los.  If Hoke wanted short passes incorporated into the offensive game plan, they'd be in there.  Hoke seems to be lock in step with what Borges is doing or vice versa, Borges is following what the HC wants him to do.


October 16th, 2013 at 12:48 PM ^

Indiana has no business being a 10 pt dog vs. Michigan in Ann Arbor, but there they are.

If Michigan has been struggling to beat Akron, UConn and Penn State, it may surprise people to understand that Indiana, with 20+ starters back, is better than all three of those combined. And the Hoosiers' loss to Missouri by 17 (and they played them pretty tough at home) is looking better every goddamned week.

Oh and uh, by the way. Michigan is 65th in the nation in passing defense right now.


October 16th, 2013 at 4:29 PM ^

Borges needs to give up coaching the QB and someone else should be brought in.  The line is still young so I think another year is warranted.  Does everyone recall that the O-Line recruiting was horrible before Hoke arrved?  Do we remember that the guys inside are young and inexperienced?

I don't know if we also need an upgrade at the O-Line coaching position, but I think Hoke/Borges deserve another year so at least there is more experience on the line. I do think we need a separate QB coach, however.


October 16th, 2013 at 4:38 PM ^

of things is the emphais placed on doing things he didn't want as opposed to what actually occurred. There were 53 running plays, OK. And 27 of them by Fitz earned a yard, statistically.

Yet, he says that the idea was to feature the kicker in OT after the kicker couldn't win the game in regulation. And the fear was a TO in OT, which means that playing not to lose was the primary strategy over winning the game. 

If you acknowledge that your passer has better footwork and is making great strides. And if you know that he threw three long TD passes in regulation and two to a physically gifted receiver who can overpower most anyone defending him, why don't you milk that advantage? 

Here's why: the fear of failure outsized the decision to win the game. The fear of making a mistake, outweighed the decision to push the envelope and go for a TD. And that was signaled by the first response Borges gave, claiming that the staff thinks the world of Gibbons as a kicker, which is great. 

But why do you want to leave it up to the kicker if your passer is doing such a good job. You throw the ball with 25 seconds left to move the ball downfield, but you don't want to throw it when there are 25 yards for a score that will give you a victory? I don't get that logic.