Positive Post: All Hail Khoury, Demens, and Forcier
All came off the bench and manned up. Sure, Tate made a few costly mistakes but he did keep UM in the game. Khoury did a great job at center considering the circumstances. And Demens stepped in and filled the gaps and made some great tackles for a team that really is struggling to tackle.
addendum: Reason Kovacs isn't listed here is because he started. I am hailing those that came off the bench and performed pretty darn well for not being starters or getting a lot of playing time. But yes, Kovacs did a hell of a job and has a lot of responsibility put on his shoulders considering just how porous the D is. He gets no help what so ever.
October 17th, 2010 at 10:28 AM ^
True, we were down 21 when Tate came in if I remember correctly - he would make a good change up in future games.
We are young, patience is a virtue. 8-4 is still within sight.
October 17th, 2010 at 10:32 AM ^
I doubt Tate would have thrown that last INT if Mouton would have made that open field tackle to get us the ball back. There were a few minutes left and we would have been down 7 with all three time outs. Tate wouldn't have had to force the issue down field so much.
October 17th, 2010 at 10:47 AM ^
I know there were a lot of them, but the one that I remember being the 'nail' was missed by Avery on a dump off to Adam Robinson on 3rd and 10 with 3:40 to go. He had him for no gain.
The true freshman was in position to make the play and just couldn't bring down a pretty good back. I agree on the Tate what-if though. He got desperate and became way predictable trying to win (Stonum all day!).
October 17th, 2010 at 12:21 PM ^
that I am thinking of. I assumed it was the number 8 when it could have been a 9. Who ever it was I just wished they could have slowed Robinson down long enough to allow help to arrive.
October 17th, 2010 at 12:41 PM ^
Dude. It was Courtney Avery, who wears the number 5 now after we got in trouble for having both he and Odoms on the field during a kick return.
I can't blame him for missing the tackle. He's a true freshman CB going up against their #1 RB. That would have been an NFL caliber open-field tackle.
October 17th, 2010 at 12:45 PM ^
The RB didn't put a move on Avery. Avery just took a bad angle and whiffed. Freshman or not, he needs to make that tackle.
October 17th, 2010 at 3:03 PM ^
Technically, he isn't their #1 running back.
October 17th, 2010 at 10:32 AM ^
I thought Tate came in after first or second play of second half, I think it was 21-7.
October 17th, 2010 at 10:38 AM ^
it was 21-7 when Denard was hurt. Tate came in drove us down the field and Smith fumbled. Iowa went straight down and scored making it 28-7.
October 17th, 2010 at 11:23 AM ^
My heart hurts from just reading that.
October 17th, 2010 at 12:00 PM ^
1) The fact that V. Smith fumbled after being barely touched?
2) the fact they called a play for V. Smith to run between the tackles after he has proven he can't do that at ALL?
I vote for 2 and that is ALL on the coaches...
October 17th, 2010 at 12:39 PM ^
I agree that I don't understand that. Hopkins fumbles once and is benched for three games. V.Smith fumbles and he's back on he next series.
October 17th, 2010 at 5:12 PM ^
There is more to playing the position than just carrying the ball. Smith is our best receiver and blocker among the backs. That's why he plays, especially in passing situations.
October 17th, 2010 at 11:51 PM ^
but that was a running play. Maye it is too obvious to only have him block or catch but on that particular play I think he needed to be on the sideline.
October 17th, 2010 at 12:39 PM ^
I agree that I don't understand that. Hopkins fumbles once and is benched for three games. V.Smith fumbles and he's back on he next series.
October 17th, 2010 at 1:14 PM ^
Smith was NOT barely touched - he was engulfed in a bear hug by the tackler. The guy literally squeezed Smith until the ball squirted loose.
If you want to say he's too small to run up the gut, I'm OK with that (you point, #2), but he was far from barely touched on that play.
October 17th, 2010 at 1:20 PM ^
well your right and wrong...while he was bear hugged by the DT, he had already dropped the ball on first contact. smith has been pretty reliable with ball security this season, but lets not make excuses for when he f's up
October 17th, 2010 at 1:48 PM ^
October 17th, 2010 at 2:04 PM ^
1) You are just flat wrong, there is no other way to describe this to you if you don't understand this already.
2) You are so right it makes me sick. Couldn't agree more.
October 17th, 2010 at 10:43 AM ^
100% agree with Demens. Nobody should be thinking he's David Harris, but it was revealing that the first two times the PA announcer called out the tackler, it was Demens. Lots of folks sitting around us were saying "Yes! finally some plays from that position!"
According to Sam Webb and Michael Taylor on WTKA this morning, after the first two series, with Demens showing something that's been completely absent from Ezeh's play, all of a sudden Demens is out of the game and Ezeh's back in, and predictably doing poorly. Webb said that RR then ran down the sideline towards Robinson, apparently (paraphrasing Webb's interpretation) basically yelling "Where the @#%@*& is Demens?" Right away, Demens is back in the game.
They also said that Adam Patterson played the entire game, and that Campbell didn't see any snaps on defense.
Assuming that these observations are accurate, I really have to wonder just what's going on with defensive personnel decisions. I'm not trying to say that Campbell deserves to be a starter, but not giving him any opportunities to play whatsoever when we're a bit small on the d-line to begin with and going against a big, physical OL to boot is more than a little mystifying to me. Taking out Demens after he proved in the first two series that he brings more to the field than Obi is ever going to is just plain bizarre, and it seems that RR might have shared that view.
I don't know if Robinson is the one who makes those on-field decisions on who to put out there and who not to, but as DC he has ultimate responsibility. The inability to figure out that Ezeh was never going to be more than he's shown, and that it was entirely warranted to try somebody else before this game is an alarming fact. It makes it a bit difficult escape the nagging suspicion that RR's selection of Robinson for DC is not the best decision he could have made. I hope the next three games prove that suspicion is unfounded.
October 17th, 2010 at 11:15 AM ^
Did you see WC on the blocked field goal attempt? He still has pad level issues. He came off the blocks too high and was pushed back 4 yards.
October 17th, 2010 at 12:18 PM ^
That's Correct. My question is: Is this a technique issue that should have been resolved through coaching. He's had 1 1/2 seasons, two fall practices, and one spring practice to fix this. Is this something curable through coaching or not?
October 17th, 2010 at 12:28 PM ^
I sort of doubt that something as simple and fundamental as pad level is being ignored or going unnoticed by the coaches. You can tell a guy and tell a guy and tell a guy to do it, but in the end you can't make him. The rest of the team doesn't seem to have that problem.
October 17th, 2010 at 1:29 PM ^
Yep. Sometimes players will ignore coaching, or when your blood is up you revert to what youve done for years.
October 17th, 2010 at 11:37 AM ^
Completely baffled when Ezeh went back out there after Demens had his good first series. Good for RR for laying into GERG. No idea what his rationale could have been to put Ezeh back in after how Demens had just played.
Anxious to see Demens and Ezeh notes in defensive UFR this week.
October 17th, 2010 at 3:41 PM ^
I too was baffled when I saw Ezeh come on and run himself into a pancake block.
October 17th, 2010 at 10:45 AM ^
Tate was great. Demens was equally excellent. Khoury played well. Penn State should be an excellent tune up (dare I say that?) and hopefully we can steal one from Wisconsin/OSU. The moral of the story: if Michigan plays well, they can win any game. If they do not play well, they are still not good enough to play poorly and win.
October 17th, 2010 at 1:19 PM ^
The moral of the story: if Michigan plays well, they can win any game. If they do not play well, they are still not good enough to play poorly and win.
And that is why better days are coming. Young teams lack maturity, discipline, and consistency. Some things you have to grow into.
Could not have said it better.
October 17th, 2010 at 1:30 PM ^
Better days are coming. They lost to a Top 15 team with a bunch of freshmen and sophomores starting. Do the math.
Also, I am looking forward to more Stephen Hopkins and come next year more more more Dee Hart.
October 17th, 2010 at 10:46 AM ^
as usual and was way out of position and over ran the play. Avery had ARob lined up but missed horribly. Back technique that I am sure Gibson taught him. The poor mechanics from our secondary is all on the coach. Gibson is a terrible coach and it is costing these kids a lot. Thanks RR for keeping that clown around.
October 17th, 2010 at 12:49 PM ^
You idiot. How many times do we have to repeat this before it sinks in: Avery is a true freshman who's been coached up by Gibson for all of a few months. If it weren't for the extremely extenuating circumstances, he wouldn't even be on the field in any capacity, and Coach Rod has said as much.
October 17th, 2010 at 12:57 PM ^
OMG a true freshman doesn't have the most perfect technique in every facet of the position and missed a tackle even an all-american could easily miss!!11!!11!!!!!
Do us all a favor go kick yourself in the nuts dude.
October 17th, 2010 at 1:43 PM ^
thanks.
October 17th, 2010 at 10:53 AM ^
Sans the turnovers and CRAPPY kickoffs, isn't anyone else impressed with how Michigan played...even defensively? This team is getting better, the W/L column doesn't evidence this the last two games, but I still think they're on the right track...almost there...
October 17th, 2010 at 10:58 AM ^
It's a real Jekyll-and-Hyde defense... good enough to force a good number of third-and-longs over the last two weeks, and bad enough to allow repeated drive-sustaining conversions. As frustrating as it is for us to watch, it's got to be mind-numbingly worse for the players and coaches.
October 17th, 2010 at 11:21 AM ^
include "Kovacs" in the title. Seemed every time a big play or tackle was made on 3rd down, Kovacs was responsible. He's the most dependable tackler on the damn field, walk-on or not.
October 17th, 2010 at 1:26 PM ^
I thought Kovacs shouldn't play D1 ball..
<br>
<br>Actually I didn't but some dickheads thrashing him before the season felt like he was the reason we were losing games..
<br>
<br>This kid can play.
October 17th, 2010 at 11:24 AM ^
I see what you mean, the defense has been so bad, that during yesterday's game when Michigan forced Iowa to punt, my girlfriend (knows almost nothing about football) looks to me and says "Is that the first time Michigan has done that all year?" I laughed and thought... oh crap, is it? But seriously though, Michigan made some big stops, and while we gave up a couple of easy touchdowns, Michigan's D held their own. The D obviously must improve, but I think it started to yesterday. There's obviously a long way to go, but I saw some baby steps yesterday.
October 17th, 2010 at 11:41 AM ^
I haven't gone back and watched the game again, but it seems like this week (and last) the defensive front has been too aggressive on 3rd and long and gotten burned on screens, cutbacks, etc.
October 17th, 2010 at 11:44 AM ^
October 17th, 2010 at 12:09 PM ^
It's almost a false hope. I think both MSU and Iowa started the games real conservative offensively to kind of feel out the UM defense. Once both of these teams started to open up the play book, the floodgates opened and they scored points on almost every drive.
October 17th, 2010 at 12:44 PM ^
Don it's worse for us.
October 17th, 2010 at 1:46 PM ^
They don't have to re-read the same crappy board topics re-posted again and again on the topic. We don't make crappy posters practice and fix their topics; at least the players will work on their deficiencies.
October 17th, 2010 at 3:10 PM ^
I wanted to log in and say that this, right here, is one of the stupidest fucking posts in the history of MGoBlog.
October 17th, 2010 at 1:45 PM ^
We HAD 'em on that 3rd and long at the end of the game yesterday, tho. A missed tackle and they got the first. That was tough to watch.
October 17th, 2010 at 11:07 AM ^
I agree, for some reason I took positives out of this game.
October 17th, 2010 at 11:25 AM ^
Same here, I think it's mainly because we put up 28 points on one of the best defenses in the country despite have a really shitty day (4 turnovers) and had a chance to win in the end.
October 17th, 2010 at 2:07 PM ^
We'd need to be in a position to win or be competitive for me to be impressed. I'm not going to parse plays and try to find positives like "Lewan has nice footwork" or "Demens made a play". I watch a team and this team isn't competitive with quality teams.
D'Antonio has been at MSU for one more year than RR has been at UM and we were throttled in that game. Unless you want to argue that he inherited a roster that was many times better than what RR inherited, you can only conclude that RR has not done as good of a coaching job as D'Antonio.
October 17th, 2010 at 10:59 AM ^
Will Campbell must have boinked Rich Rod's wife or daughter to not see the field with Martin out. I like the fact that Patterson has hung on for five years and is seeing some PT but he is undersized by what 30 pounds at least. Can't they at least give the big guy a shot to see if he is capable?
October 18th, 2010 at 6:54 AM ^
having Devin Gardner as #2 starting the season. He could have kept his redshirt, but RR wanted to make a point. He's likely doing the same thing to Campbell. Let's hope it pays off.