Am I the only one who isn't a fan of Tate?

Submitted by MGoDC on

I know Tate seems to be a pretty popular guy around here, but I guess I just had to ask if anybody else finds him to be a bit cocky/kinda douchey. No doubt he is a good football player, but I can't help but feel like if he were the starting QB at any other big ten school (even ones we traditionally don't have much animosity for like Northwestern) many of us would probably point out that he seems like a douchenozzle.

As a current student I've seen both Denard and Tate around the Union some (havent talked to either of them personally) and Denard is usually laughing about something and talking with regular students. Tate, on the other hand, seems to keep more to himself, keeping himself relatively separated from the random student body.

But more than that, and more than just a general sense of arrogance I see when he talks to the media, one specific thing sticks in my mind. A couple days after an article came up (I think it was on rivals but I'm not sure) praising Denard's strides as a QB in the spring game, Tate put the article up on his facebook "wall of shame" and added the comment "I was against the 1s he was against the 2s." Personally if Tate can't get excited for a teammate's success, even at the same position, then I find myself really not wanting to root against him.

Obviously as a UM fan/student I'll be rooting for Tate's success every time he touches the ball, but I can't help but feel a really strong hope that Denard somehow manages to win the starting job outright and Tate transfers in 2011 (when DG would be able to be a solid backup as a RS Freshman). Personally this is not a guy I want to have to cheer for and not a guy I want representing my school. Undoubtedly an extremely unpopular opinion here but I just wanted to see if literally anybody else on this board feels the same way.

snowcrash

June 29th, 2010 at 11:52 AM ^

He forced a bunch of passes he shouldn't have, but he also repeatedly made plays on his own to keep us in that game. Long drives that end in turnovers are still better than 3 and outs.

(Edit: on my browser this is showing up as a reply to Tacopants' post. I wrote it as a reply to the post accusing Forcier of singlehandedly losing the OSU game.) 

gremlin

June 29th, 2010 at 9:55 AM ^

Don't be afraid to share your opinion here.  I also was very disappointed to hear about Denard ending up on his "wall of shame". 

Blue in Yarmouth

June 29th, 2010 at 9:55 AM ^

I can't speak for anyone else and certainly you are entitled to your opinion but I would say I am a fan of his. The only reason for this is that he plays for UM and they are my team.

I also have never met the guy or even seen him in person, so Ihave no personal perspective from which to base my opinion.

Having said all this, I simply have been hoping that Denard wins the QB job this year purely because I really like the guy and want to see him on the field more. It is nothing negative toward Tate, I just would like to see Denard progress enough to win the job.

I should clarify that I only want him to win the job because I would be excited to see what he could do if he got the passing game down. He would be electric back there.

chunkums

June 29th, 2010 at 9:55 AM ^

Though qbforce is straight up weird, a quarterback should be very confident.  Maybe other teams don't like him, but he's OURS.  Every fan of other Big 10 schools I've talked to hated Mike Hart, but can you say the same?

BlockM

June 29th, 2010 at 9:59 AM ^

There are two types of players I want on my team:

  • The players other teams/fan bases hate begrudgingly because they beat their team but simultaneously seem to be pretty fun people to be around.
  • The players other teams/fan bases love to hate because they beat their team and are cocky about it.

Both of those types of players have one thing in common. As long as that's the case, I could care less. I'd love for every player to be personable and friendly, but that will never happen. Just give me winners.

JeepinBen

June 29th, 2010 at 10:00 AM ^

I'm one of very few of my friends who are much more excited about Denard than Tate. I think that Denard has the skill set/ability to be a top 5 QB in the league by his senior year, while I think Tate wont get any better physically, but hopefully he'll get better mentally.

I think the future at QB is Denard... but I'm going to support both guys because the present needs them both to succeed.

Blue Blue Blue

June 29th, 2010 at 10:43 AM ^

If Denard can continue to improve his passing, and plays in Big 10 games the way he played in the Spring game, he would be the true run/pass threat that will open up the defense.

 

but Gardner has the look of a future NFL QB....sort of Vince Young 2.0

 

Tate is a nice QB, and a very grittly competitor, but he doesnt have a rocket laser arm, he isnt a significant running threat, and he seems to get banged up a lot.   He forced a number of passes in the Spring game, and was lucky a few werent picked.

joeyb

June 29th, 2010 at 10:03 AM ^

Confidence and cockiness are two different things. You can have the guy who doesn't know if he can lead the team down the field to beat Notre Dame with 11 seconds left (no confidence, no cockiness), the guy who knows he can (confidence, no cockiness), or the guy who thinks he is entitled to his position and it doesn't matter if he leads the team down the field (confidence, cockiness). Which would you prefer?

Hard Gay

June 29th, 2010 at 10:04 AM ^

while i've never had any interactions with tate personally, I've dropped enough eaves around him and heard enough stories that make me a much bigger denard fan.  Sure, probably not all these stories are true, but a lot of people like to say unflattering things about tate, whereas they agree that denard is a nice guy.

Blue 57

June 29th, 2010 at 10:13 AM ^

say that. One of my friends works with the student-athletes. I was there talking to him during the spring game and his exact words were, "Tate is an asshole." He said it twice to make sure I got it. He also said that he's getting into a lot of trouble. Nothing major, but little bullshit knuckle head type stuff. Just telling you what I heard about him from a source that works closely to everyone. 

bringthewood

June 29th, 2010 at 10:42 AM ^

We said the same thing about Rick Leach in the day.  He was a damm good quarterback and won a ton or games.  Was he a nice friendly guy?  No.  It would be nice if our QB was nice, kind and good.  I'll settle for good.

TrppWlbrnID

June 29th, 2010 at 10:36 AM ^

OMG! Tate is so dark and mysterious, he just keeps to himself and his web page, and Denard is soooo cool and funny.  I'm all, like, you know, confused about which one to like more!!! If only one of them would ask me to the dance, i would know how my heart feels.  I think i saw Tate drive fast and has glittery skin and Denard ate some raw meat and howls a lot, i am soooo confused.

jg2112

June 29th, 2010 at 10:28 AM ^

If you're that worried about it, just tell people you bought a Vlad Emilien jersey.

You'll have to explain away why Emilien's a bust, but that might be easier than explaining why you don't like a true sophomore QB who, to be honest, had a quite excellent true freshman year given the circumstances of the 2009 season.

jumpbalya

June 29th, 2010 at 10:06 AM ^

Tate does not transfer.  I'm kind of sick of seeing great games led by players that are no longer here (meaning games in the last 2-3 years, not any longer ago).

Smitty D

June 29th, 2010 at 10:40 AM ^

in every single comment you post, you don't need () explaining your freaking point! OMG every freaking one of your post is like this

 

"Hey I don't like Tate" (But what I mean is that I do not like him as a QB, but I like him as a person)

another example

I don't like when you post (what I really mean is you suck)

WTF-Panda

June 29th, 2010 at 10:11 AM ^

...they could start Satan McLucifer out there and I wouldn't care as long as he remains academically eligible, abides by the rules, and helps us win.

snowcrash

June 29th, 2010 at 11:42 AM ^

I knew Henson (I was a TA and he was in one of my sections) and he was a nice guy, never gave me any kind of attitude. One time I ran into him when I was doing my laundry and he was hanging out with some other guys in my apartment complex, and he offered me a beer.

Hail-Storm

June 29th, 2010 at 10:33 AM ^

I don't care as much about fans perception of the player as much as the other players perception. It seemed that Mallet was not liked by a lot of the older players, and that was concerning to me.  Tate seems (again only a perception from seeing him interact on the sideline and at spring practice) like he has the team on his side and they trust and back him. As long as he has the team's trust, he has mine.

Now if you are asking me who I am more excited about playing QB this fall, I really like Tate and have a number five maize shirt ready to go, but D-Rob seems pretty special and crazy dangerous on every play. I usually always go for the safe bet, but if I had a choice, I want the high stakes gamble with Denard.

I also wouldn't worry to much about how they interact with other students either. As someone mentioned, they are not pro's.  From your description it sounds like Denard is just one of those personalities that can talk to anyone, and just kinda can own a room without trying. Tate sounds like he is just a little more reserved and doesn't always want the spotlight off the field. I remember hearing my freshman year that Drew Henson had a sign up list for girls to visit his dorm room. No one cares about these stories when you're winning. I say give the kids a break.

JeepinBen

June 29th, 2010 at 10:42 AM ^

Was one of the most douchy people I've ever met. Also one of the ugliest people I've ever met. 

That said, the "cockiness" displayed by a quarterback is necessary. Some call it Moxie. To a certain extent you need to have the "I'm the fucking man" mentality to succeed. There are multiple ways to know you're good and use it though. For example, Peyton Manning knows he's the man, and he works hard to stay on top. Tony Romo has been told he's the man, so he goes to Cabo. Just examples. 

I think in general I like my dominant athletes who know they're dominant to also be humble about it and be good people off the field while they're at it. (See Graham, Brandon)

With Tate - he had a great start to his freshman year, and was The Man during October. He got hurt, Molk got hurt, the wheels came off, and he wasn't that sweet any more. I'm just hoping that he takes the pressure from Denard and others and uses it to improve himself and the team. 

B

June 29th, 2010 at 10:15 AM ^

You are not alone.  I don't like his attitude either, and I have always been suspicious of his work ethic.  That said, if he can perform on the field and be a team player, I'm not sure I care that much.

Blue-Chip

June 29th, 2010 at 10:41 AM ^

I want all the home field advantage I can get.  Let's make the other team uncomfortable from the second warm ups start to the time they go back to the locker room.  No need (or reason) to wait for something to happen.

jg2112

June 29th, 2010 at 10:43 AM ^

You're absolutely right.

I look forward to the team stopping games this fall after they get a lead, going back to the locker room, and THEN running out to jump and touch the M Club Banner.

After all, there's no reason to make noise UNTIL the team does something, right?

Huntington Wolverine

June 29th, 2010 at 10:51 AM ^

Yeah, I would question the work ethic of a kid that's been training since gradeschool and used to ride the train to additional practices after his team workouts. Or inviting a wide receiver to visit him in California so they work on reps together in the offseason. Work ethic, really? You want to question the work ethic of anyone spending their off season on Barwis Beach?

megalomanick

June 29th, 2010 at 10:18 AM ^

Yeah, that Mike Hart guy was a real cocky asshole too. Did you like him?

 

I loved Mike Hart and I love Tate for the same reason. They both give their all for Michigan Football. Are they both a bit arrogant? Sure, even over the top with it at times. However, we call ourselves "The Leaders and Best." Isn't that a bit arrogant too? Anyone who bleeds for Michigan Football is okay in my book.

Calling out a kid like this is pretty unacceptable, at least in my mind. Players read this site, and cheerfully suggesting one of them transfer to another school serves no purpose. Nor does calling them out as assholes.

WichitanWolverine

June 29th, 2010 at 10:26 AM ^

Sorry, but I've got to neg you for that.  I'm trying to stay out of this since I got absolutely hammered the last time I started a thread on Tate but for you to compare Forcier and Hart is pretty unfair, IMO. 

Hart was a proven beast on the field.  He bought himself the right to say what he wanted.  And really, what did he say during his career besides the "little brother" thing?  When you go 4-0 against your in-state rival and do it impressively (on his part, anyway), you have the right to say that.

If Forcier can produce the way Hart did, then I couldn't care less what he has to say.  Until then, I think it'd be in his best interest to keep a lid on it.

Huntington Wolverine

June 29th, 2010 at 10:47 AM ^

Hart was cocky from the start, not just his senior year. And he loved him because of his swagger and his performances. Also, Tate did a pretty good job this last fall for a true freshman. Compare the talent level on the team in 2009 to Hart's freshman year when he had Braylon, Avant, Breaston, and Henne to stretch a defense and ran behind Baas, Long, Lentz, Stenavich. Not taking anything away from Hart but considering the drop in talent, Tate did just fine except for some freshman QB mistakes.