So in light of the Press Conference
Who feels pretty stupid for saying that RR was stupid for keeping Denard in for the last series?
You have no idea what happens on the sidelines and you have to trust that the coach who is getting paid more than (I'm just going to make a wild guess here) anyone on this board knows what he is doing. This doesn't mean that he should never be questioned but his knows his players more than us and obviously noticed that something was up with Tate.
October 12th, 2009 at 2:08 PM ^
I'm much happier that we had death by drob than sheridan. If sheridan is in there I see the series going like this: sack, almost int, then int. Drob came in and made some plays to get Mich to the point they were in up to that int. Sheridan IS NOT GOING TO SEE THE FIELD AGAIN. He is not good. He's got his job now and its holding the damn clip board and nothing else. Sometimes I wish Sheridan would just transfer so we don't have to hear all this shoulda brought in sheridan crap.
October 12th, 2009 at 2:33 PM ^
You don't need to wait for a medical diagnosis that someone has suffered a concussion to know that they do not have all their ducks in a row and should not be on the field
October 12th, 2009 at 5:17 PM ^
You've lost more points today than the Dow has in a month. I'm glad my mutual funds are not connected to your point total.
October 12th, 2009 at 12:52 PM ^
I'm not questioning the decision to keep DR in, but I'm questioning your logic. If RR noticed something was wrong with Tate why not say so in today's press conference? He had every opportunity to do so. I understand "protecting" Tate by not sharing the reason with the media if his reasoning was something like "He sucked out there! Couldn't make a play," but if he is going to announce Tate had a concussion he could have easily pinned his decision to yank Tate on the injury, yet he didn't.
October 12th, 2009 at 1:04 PM ^
Like I said above, he may have done it not for Tate but for Denard. Tate had to have already known why he was out. He did it for Denard, to protect him and his confidence, he doesn't need to worry about Tate's confidence.
October 12th, 2009 at 1:10 PM ^
Rationalizing to the nth degree. Way to go! You should be in RR's posse!
October 12th, 2009 at 1:15 PM ^
Thanks for the referral?
I'd rather think of any possibility for something happening then be stuck in my ways thinking that RR has no idea how to coach a ballgame.
October 12th, 2009 at 1:23 PM ^
What exactly is this posse called? Is it called The Defenders of Rodriguez (TDoR)?
October 12th, 2009 at 1:03 PM ^
freaked out and called RR an idiot for leaving in Robinson. He obviously knows what he is doing and wouldn't have been able to get as far as he has at every level without that. (FOR EXAMPLE THIS PARAGRAPH)
"That being said, I have been watching Rodriguez closely and am not impressed with his in game demeanor. The guy rips into players virtually every time they come off the field. He was in Forcier's face 3 or 4 times. You have this nagging sense that Rodriguez's brain is wired to say to himself "Given that I am offensive genius, when things don't work out, it must be someone else's fault." Ripping Tate a new one repeatedly isn't being a coach -- it's being a brat. Saying "Tate needs to get that fixed" as you run off the field at the end of the first half when you are referring to a fluke slip of the hand is just petty. And allowing your fit of pique to lead you to take the ball away from a guy who has led three stunning fourth quarter comebacks is to allow emotion to control over reason. Through the entire first half, I was begging Rodriguez to run more. I really questioned the playcalling -- I think you have to dial it back a bit on the road and try to manage the game more. And no, I am not surprised that we turn the ball over a lot on the road when we have a super-complex offense that requires every player on the team to spend the last ten seconds of the pre-play NOT thinking about what they are going to do, but rather looking over at Rodriguez as he "makes adjustments" to "what he is seeing in the defense." Lloyd and Bo weren't ones to spare the lash -- but they did it with purpose in specific situations where it was merited. They didn't do it as a habit to vent stress. Hell, Bo was too busy shredding the refs to divert precious time to shredding his own players. I am not yet seeing an on-field leader in Rodriguez. An offensive coordinator and a brilliant one? Absolutely. A head coach? My jury is still out." (link http://mgoblog.com/diaries/observations-iowa-game)
October 12th, 2009 at 1:06 PM ^
That is from the same type of person that will be all over Coach Rodriguez's sack next year when we're running rickshaw on the big 11.
October 12th, 2009 at 1:21 PM ^
Hell, there is no shortage of bandwagon jumpers. As soon as RichRod gets us a win over OSU and a BCS Game, everyone will think he is great.
As for morons who think screaming at players as they come of the field is some kind of sin, go back to kindergarden. It's part of the game. I was called every name in the book when I played, albeit the highest level I ever achieved was high school. But I stay in touch with that SOB coach because he really cared that I do the best I could.
Go take a look at Bo in his day. Wouldn't want to screw up on his watch.
October 12th, 2009 at 1:54 PM ^
Could not agree more that these boys are adults and can handle the tongue lashing (not sure about the student assistant who's fault the slippery ball apparently was) from their coach. However, seeing that I sat in row 1 on the 50 behind the Michigan bench, I have to question where Coach Rod draws the line? There were times during the game when I questioned whether the verbal tirades were costing the team in his ability to continue coaching. Coach Rod spent 15 minutes completely consumed by the fact the ball slipped out of Tate's hand and making sure the young man responsible damn well knew he just cost Michigan a fumble.
What was the benefit? None. He mentally was not able to let this go without making a 2nd, 3rd and 4th trip back down the sideline to yell at the group with the balls. My question is how this severely impacted his ability to be in the game? There is NO WAY he was able to "coach" through this time period.
October 12th, 2009 at 2:14 PM ^
"Wait til next year!"
Wow, 2.8 mill will not only buy you a snazzy house in an upscale Ann Arbor neighborhood, it will buy you an entire fan base willing to offer up excuses for everything that goes wrong on your watch.
Nice!
October 12th, 2009 at 5:24 PM ^
I can't wait until we run rickshaws! It will be sooo sweet, little rickshaws, winged rickshaws...
October 12th, 2009 at 2:27 PM ^
...why not say so in today's press conference?
He isn't obligated to, for one thing.......
October 12th, 2009 at 1:22 PM ^
I think it's reasonable to question the decision even though we didn't (and still probably don't) know all the facts as to why the decision was made.
After the game was decided, I didn't come back here to read the threads, but I did get into a disagreement with a friend of mine as to who should have played that final series. I said that Rodriguez had made a mistake. He said he didn't. Both things are reasonable to think and advocate for, and in my opinion still are. Now knowing that Tate had a concussion but that RR didn't know at the time, I am glad RR didn't play him, but I still disagree with his decision. If that makes sense.
FWIW, the idea also crossed my mind that Sheridan might have been the better call then Denard. But then I reconsidered because uncertainty > DEATH.
October 12th, 2009 at 2:35 PM ^
But it's completely different from saying, "Rodriguez made a bad decision" or "Rodriguez is childish" etc. etc.
Rich Rod does not know all.... but compared to what we know, he might as well.
October 12th, 2009 at 6:06 PM ^
It's COMPLETELY legitimate to say that RR "made a bad decision" if someone believes that, and has legitimate rationale. Brian just did that himself.
What not legit is to say he's a bad coach, or we're screwed forever, or he doesn't know what he's doing, all of which is objectively not true.
October 12th, 2009 at 1:33 PM ^
Blasphemy maybe, but I think there was one situation this season where I would have put Sheridan in. The last drive against Indiana after Warren's "interception." Tate was obviously having issues with his arm / shoulder and neither he nor Denard have spent much time under center. With the situation calling for handling a snap from under center and kneeling, that was a good time for Sheridan. (No sarcasm, I actually mean this)
October 12th, 2009 at 1:30 PM ^
Rodriguez made a mistake. He should have made sure Robinson had more reps in past games, a first half possession or two against MSU and an entrance into the game vs Iowa earlier.
Ball at the UM 41 with 55 seconds to go. With first downs and clock killing spikes, plenty of time for a run first guy like DRob to get us into FG range.
Robinson should have tucked and ran on that last fatefull pass. It was second and 2, so he sould have got the first and about 10 more yards.
Now, we're in Iowa territory, a first down and 40 seconds. PLenty of time to get 10-15 more yards and a reasaonable FG try.
This was not a bad decision. Just one that did not work out. There is a difference.
October 12th, 2009 at 1:50 PM ^
Hell yes to it being a mistake not having played Denard more often before this game. I hope that Tate's injury brings that home to a lot more "fans."
October 12th, 2009 at 1:51 PM ^
It would have been nice to get DRob some more reps in the previous games, but remember that we only had three possessions against Sparty in the first half. Also, IU and ND were close games, and EMU was closer than expected in the first half. DRob needs to learn to check down - Marty O was wide open with space to run on the crossing route. He'll learn not to force passes in time. It's too bad this learning moment happened when it did.
October 12th, 2009 at 1:54 PM ^
But, are you really surprised w/ what actually happened? I would have been infinitely more surprised w/ a drive into fg range than w/ a poorly thrown interception. To ask a kid that has been on campus for 2 months to run a 2 minute drill w/ no timeouts and limited knowledge of the playbook and sketchy accuracy on downfield throws is asking for a miracle.
October 12th, 2009 at 1:56 PM ^
I think most of us realized that Tate is not invincible, and that he MAY get dinged up/injured where we would need Denard to actually carry us at some point. Now our last 3 games have not been ideal to get DR some work, but the last throw I think he was determined to pass it because Rich Rod was emphasizing to hurry things up (I am not criticizing that action, we had to hurry up, but DR may have read that as throw the ball don't run). As a result, I wonder if it took DR out of "his game" and running it on 2nd a 2. Get to the sidelines, stop the clock and settle things down.
Realistically they only had to get to around the 30 yard line to give Olesnavage an opportunity to hit a 47 yard FG, which would be 29 total yards from the 2nd a 2 placement (UM 41 yard line).
October 12th, 2009 at 4:03 PM ^
qualifies as a bad decision. As a gambling guy you know that probabilities and past performance in similar situations count for a lot. IMO RR went against that in making this decision. That IMO makes it a bad call. Now that doesn't count for anything, he's still a good coach and worthy of all our respect, and no coach Bo included goes through his career without making several mistakes, but that doesn't mean we can't legitimately believe it was a bad decision.
October 12th, 2009 at 4:30 PM ^
A first half possession or two against MSU, and an earlier entry into the Iowa game? What would then, about four more total possessions over the course of the season do?
Not much, if anything. And when people axe why Sheridan doesn't play, and I guess, it's because he stinks, welllll--maybe Denard doesn't play more QB because he isn't ready???? And it showed.
Sorry. It was a mistake--and that, by the way, is my first criticism of The Mighty Godriguez since the season started. Wow. I AM a Bad Man!!
Poor Michigan fans. Just can't accept that Godriguez isn't perfect.
October 12th, 2009 at 5:00 PM ^
You know, you might have some nuggets of good points somewhere in all of you comments, but you come across as such a huge prick that no one at all is going to listen to you.
October 12th, 2009 at 5:28 PM ^
Infinitely.
October 12th, 2009 at 6:29 PM ^
I was not at all mentally prepared for the INT because it was 2nd and 2 or 3. There was plenty of time. He could pull it down (all he needed was the first) or just throw it away. No need to force anything downfield. When he chucked it I figured he had something really good.
I guess I've become accustomed to watching Roethlisberger and not freshman. Last season, I just would have been relieved he wasn't being sacked.
October 12th, 2009 at 2:34 PM ^
I thought there were two passes...sorry 'bout that Belch, you know about 'Mob mentality'
October 12th, 2009 at 3:34 PM ^
I don't know that this really happened, but...
It is often the case that when the QB breaks the pocket, a receiver on that side of the field is supposed to go deep. Denard threw the ball to a spot where Hemingway would have been (approximately) if he had turned into a go route. Difficult to tell on TV, but it seemed to me that Hemingway was pretty much standing still. If he had gone deep, he would have been in the area of the ball. Not saying it would have been a completion, but perhaps not an interception.