Denard After Dentist Comment Count

Brian

9/10/2011 – Michigan 35, Notre Dame 31 – 2-0

michigan-postgame-notredame

is this real life?

Not only can Denard Robinson redefine All-America teams, average nearly 500 yards per game against Notre Dame, and pilot the most insane fourth quarter Michigan Stadium has ever seen, but he can sum up what happened on Saturday in a single word:

If you still need evidence that Denard can do things other people can't, there you go. Because I've got nothing. I can gape, slack-jawed and twitching, if you'd like. Oh, and I can put my finger between my lips and go "brrrrrrrrrbbrbrbrbrbrbrbrbrrbb" with crazy googly eyes. Also I can spin in a circle going "yip yip yip yip yip."

These are my capabilities. All other functions are currently offline. Attempt to access higher cognition and you will receive 503 Gateway Not Found.

That's fine. There's nothing to say that "brrrrrrbrbrbrbrbrrbrbrb" doesn't cover anyway. I am so high, you guys. I don't even know what I'm saying.

-----------------------------

Seriously. I'm really struggling here to put words in the computer. I guess… okay.

The thing I really really hated about the first three quarters (other than everything) was the way the offense made Denard mortal. This extended beyond the usual reasons 90 yards of offense in a half make you homicidal. Not only were we lost and hopeless in our first serious game after returning nine starters from one of the nation's most explosive offenses, but the guy who didn't transfer when his offense got fired out from under him was busy playing out everyone's worst-case scenarios.

I don't think I can take football games in which I'd rather have Alex Carder than Denard Robinson. A return of freshman Denard looking like a sad panda is too depressing for a multitude of reasons but mostly because just look at him:

denard-robinson-is-a-sad-panda

Shoehorning him into an offense that doesn't fit him is a crime against man and panda and manpanda. He had to be dying in the first half as he flung balls to Tacopants and ran waggles the entire stadium could predict. People twittered me about moving him to RB so Gardner can get on the field. I couldn't block them from my phone. The tweets sat there, whispering evil things into my ear.

As I projected Denard's state of mind my own got inky black. The road ahead seemed like another two years of painful rebuilding towards a goal Denard will never see, his career relegated to that of Brandon Graham when Desmond Howard seemed in reach. It's going to kill me if Denard ends up a really good player on a mediocre team for the duration of his career and Michigan doesn't end up making anyone who wants 16 in the future wear a patch with dreads on it. It's going to be worse if he's not even a really good player. Someone is at fault for this travesty.

I was running advanced equations of blame assignment amongst Bill Martin, Rich Rodriguez, Al Borges, Dave Brandon, and bloody fate when Denard rolled out. Corralled by a Notre Dame defender, he stood perfectly still but still delivered a game-changing dart to Junior Hemingway before two more ND players could close in.

From there the delirium took over.

-----------------------------------------

That game was delirious because of the many improbable events stacked on each other. Jeremy Gallon jump-ball touchdowns. Tommy Rees's aiming device locked on Michael Floyd. Tommy Rees throwing a ball backwards for no reason. More jump balls to Junior Hemingway and Roy Roundtree and Jeremy Gallon turning invisible with 23 seconds left. All the reasons it left you with your finger between your teeth are reasons to wonder about the smoothness of this transition (not very), the repeatability of such miracles (even less).

This isn't to blame anyone—it seems that coaches are who they are and as much as I want to, you can't hire a guy based on the two years left you've got with Denard. But I hope I'm not the only one who felt a sense of foreboding in the midst of the joy and relief. We've seen this script the last two years, and never has it been as rickety.

Michigan has to fix some stuff—lots of stuff—by the Big Ten season. The stakes are only Denard's career, everyone's faith in the Ethical Les Miles theory of Hoke's success, and the very survival of pandas in the wild. I'll take the escape. I wonder what happens when the drugs wear off and real life reasserts itself.

For now, though:

The game is ova!

Non-Bullets Of WHAT?

51596685TP006_MichSt_Michjohn-navarre-buffalo-stampede

Pantheon placement. I think this is below Braylonfest—but only just—in the competition for Best Comeback Ever (that people 32 or under remember). For Michigan to pull Braylonfest out they had to recover an onside kick and survive not just triple overtime by an oft-forgotten 50-yard field goal attempt at the end of regulation that was set up by a horrible pass interference call.

A good proxy for the level of kickass in your comeback is how many people left the stadium early. While there were some people who took off when ND made it 24-7, they don't compare to the legions who left early during that MSU game. And winning that eventually got Michigan a Rose Bowl appearance. The season-long significance of this ND game is going to be lower.

It easily beats out the Buffalo Stampede game, since it's not against Minnesota or in the Metrodome, and then it's a long way to fourth place.

As far as best game ever… it depends on what you're rating it on. I like my defining victories to be well-played and not hinge on the opposing quarterback throwing the ball backwards for no reason. In terms of pure drama it's up there but with both teams unranked and not looking likely to defy that I'd say most Ohio State games before we stopped being competitive had more salt to them. We lost all the ones that came down to the last play, though.

The entire Denard interview. If you missed this, you should fix that:

 

 

Commence the bitching about the offense. Watching Michigan run a play-action bomb from the I-formation after averaging exactly two yards per carry out of the I on previous attempts was exactly what I was beating into the ground over the offseason. No one is scared of Michigan's crappy backs running power out of the I-form so no one has to cheat to it. Thus instead of Worst Waldo plays featuring Roy Roundtree and twenty yards of grass we got a lot of hopeful downfield jump balls into excellent coverage.

Michigan was lucky as hell to get most of those. That was a Jeff Bowden special right there. I'm not alone in this. There has to be some adaptation now that we know the relative success rates of manball and Denardball. When Denard's averaging 7.5 YPC (sack excluded) and the rest of the backs under are 2, power is a lost cause.

Denard has to be the focal point of the offense, fragile or no. And the new offense seemed to remove Denard's legs as the primary threat without actually reducing his carries: he had 15 carries* in just 50 snaps. Project that to last year's 72 offensive snaps per game and Denard would have carried 22(!) times. What's the point of throwing away snaps on two-yard runs from the I?

*[sack removed.]

junior-hemingway-leapPrimary thing that may just work. "Chuck it up to Hemingway" may be the world's most primitive passing game but dang if it doesn't work. Hemingway not only has great leaping ability, he's enormous and therefore capable of boxing out opponents. Add in an uncanny knack for being able to high-point the ball and he's a hell of a lot like Marquise Walker before Walker got the dropsies as a senior.

Primary thing that did work from under center. Vincent Smith's throwback screen touchdown was a great call since it used Denard's legs. He rolls, defense freaks, he throws back, Smith should have an easy touchdown if any of the offensive linemen block that one linebacker, Smith makes it happen anyway. Contrast with the earlier screen where a short Denard has to float a ball over a guy leaping in his face and ends up throwing it eight yards too far and getting it picked off.

And introducing… Facepalm Guy. The facepalm guy from the sad fugee face picture in the "So I Was Like" post: the the new Lloyd Brady? He's already won an award for "Media Criticism" from Doctor Saturday.

1) He caught ESPN's camera's capturing his facepalm moment and gave them an oh-no-you-di'in't:

2) After the game he… well, he did this:

Can a brother get a Facepalm Guy touchdown Jesus photoshop?

(HT to MGoUser Haterade.)

Defensive events. Brandon Herron and Mike Jones were supposedly out with injury but if I had to guess they were not so badly hurt they couldn't play and Michigan was trying out their other options at WLB. Desmond Morgan started, played poorly—he got trucked like he was in a BTN practice highlight-type substance—and was yanked. Then Brandin Hawthorne came in and may have been plausible. He knifed into the backfield for one key TFL on third and short. I'm guessing he was at least partially responsible for a number of Cierre Wood runs that went for big yardage, but we'll see. WLB remains a sore spot.

The other sore spot is an alarming, unexpected one: WDE. Craig Roh had zero tackles for the second straight week and while he did get a QB hurry or two he seems less impactful from that spot than he did last year. I mean, last year he split two ND linemen and picked up a huge TFL en route to a +11 day. This year he'll be lucky to break even. Hopefully he's still sick. I wonder if we see more Black in the short term.

How did Jordan Kovacs only have eight tackles?

BONUS: Will Campbell got held! By an offensive lineman!

Special teams. Matt Wile has been at least average spelling Hagerup, and with only one more real-ish game left before the latter returns it looks like Michigan will escape that suspension without much real damage. I still hate the regular punt. If ND's John Goodman hadn't made inexplicable fair catches he had tons of room on two of Wile's five punts despite Wile's excellent hangtime.

The patch thing. It's pretty cool. Some potential tweaks and additions:

  • Should we un-retire numbers? I could get behind a 98 if it meant someone was going to be sitting in front of a locker that said Tom Harmon. You'd have to ask whoever the nearest relative is.
  • Further locker room additions. Everyone who's been an All-American should have their name engraved in a fashion more understated than this legends designation…

    image

    ...but still be there. Having Chappius and Oosterbaan and Friedman and McKenzie and Dierdorf and Long's names up in the locker room would be a nice way to recognize All-Americans past.
  • Next up. AC and Woodson. If they don't put the retired numbers back in circulation. Jake Long would probably be next up way down the road.
  • The patch is too big. That's just, like, my opinion, man.

So there's this. Exploit your children for fun and profit:

Profit not applicable.

Pom-poms and RAWK and crowd noise. Is it just me or was the stadium not actually very loud when it would help out the most? The pom-poms encouraged people to use their hands shaking pom-poms instead of making noise and while the piped-in music was indeed loud, when it cut out the people in the stadium making noise were largely going "OH oh oh oh oh, OH oh oh oh oh" instead of "AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA." The latter is louder.

Putting aside the insults to the Great Tradition they represent, is the noise level created by the frippery mostly cosmetic? It has seemed much louder in Michigan Stadium—I was frustrated as I was screaming myself hoarse on the last drive while people around me shook their little plastic thingies. Plastic thingy shaking is not that intimidating, people.

And then there's the guy two rows in front of you who's shaking the thing constantly so you can't see the game. In the South they have a protocol about these things: raise that thing above your shoulder during a play and you're not getting that arm back. Here we get them every five years or so and there's always someone who thinks row 14 is the last one.

Here!

Ace took a video of the final kickoff. I'm going to point you to "so I was like" again because dammit I can. Chunkums took some killer photos, but hasn't animated them yet:

stadium-shot

ST3 goes inside the box score. Michael Scarn says trying to describe that game was like taking a picture of Bigfoot. Post-ND MonuMental riff by ppToilet. (You can't choose your username, man, it chooses you.) MonuMental himself shows up to modify his Denard action figure for the occasion.

Elsewhere

Pretty much the best. An obviously drunk Jeff at Maize Pages digs up the fantastically entertaining Roundtree-Shaw Newlywed game BTN video in response to the delerium.

Photo galleries and assorted media. Pregame shots from MNB Nation. Other shots from MNBN. The Shredder took a zillion shots. Tailgating from AnnArbor.com. Also the game. Here's a great stadium shot from Melanie Maxwell:

michigan-nd-utl-panorama

Also here's this dude:

camo-dude

The whole gallery is worth checking out.

The Desmond Howard emospective has also been youtubed. Try not to get dusty. Ryan Terpstra is making a habit of filming the hell out of ridiculous ND victories:

Wolverine Historian put together a 28 minute highlight reel.

Column-type events. Wojo. More Wojo. MVictors also fills you in on the techno viking behind Hoke: yes, it's Steve Everitt, and no, you do not want to get between him and his cubs. Kyle Meinke says Denard was a big part of the offense and the running backs weren't and that's not so cool. Florek in the Daily.

UGA/M dual-fan Michael at Braves & Birds wonders whether it's better to play poorly and win (as Michigan did) or play well and lose (as Georgia did).

Entertaining serieseses of bullets. MVictors:

On the sunny side, they pulled out all the stops in the press box for the media on hand.  Witness the butter dish of victory:

butter dish

This might have been Brandon's special bonus.

Touch the Banner:

[Robinson's] total of 446 yards and 5 touchdowns was excellent, but how he got there was strange. Through three quarters of football, he was 4-for-14 passing (if that accuracy rate sounds familiarly horrible, that's because it's the same as Michigan's kickers circa 2010) for 136 yards, 1 touchdown, and 2 interceptions.  In the fourth stanza, Robinson went 8-for-11 for 217 yards, 3 touchdowns, and 1 interception, plus a recovered Stephen Hopkins fumble that he turned into a touchdown.

BWS:

[graph]

That graph is intended as a baseline estimator for a team's real-time win probability and is independent of situation, but the site also offers a crude win probability calculator, which, while it's calibrated to an NFL scale, can at least give us a decent estimate of how unlikely Michigan's victory was: four percent, Michigan's win probability after Notre Dame's slot receiver scampered into the endzone without a defender in site. Denard Robinson laughs at your probabilities and says, "Really? Oh man, that's crazy," and throws the ball to Jeremy Gallon standing alone in the Notre Dame secondary.

Maize and Blue Nation wins best headline: "The Denard. The Denard. The Denard."

National takes: Adam Jacobi marvels and notes that Robinson couldn't throw the ball even when he was completing passes; he also points out that uh… the Big Ten is not so much this year. Doctor Saturday:

Here, instead of merely covering poorly, Notre Dame subsequently failed to cover Wolverine receiver Jeremy Gallon at all, incredibly freeing him for a 64-yard sprint to the Irish 16-yard line with eight seconds left for a) A couple shots at the winning touchdown; b) A shot at a field goal to tie; or c) A confused catastrophe that left 110,000 people contemplated mass hara-kiri. With all of every one of those people secretly fearing c), Robinson delivered the dagger.

Bruce Feldman:

Robinson was, again, heroic for Michigan. He has brutalized the Irish the past two seasons, rolling up a mind-boggling 948 yards of total offense to go with eight TDs. His performance in the fourth quarter Saturday night was downright epic: 7 of 9, 202 yards, three passing touchdowns to go with six carries for 24 yards and another TD. In all, he accounted for a staggering 226 of his team's 229 yards.

In Case You Live Under A Rock

Title reference.

Comments

Seth

September 15th, 2011 at 9:07 PM ^

Ah, thx. I shoulda counted ('09, '10, '11 --THREE!) instead of embarrassing myself there.

He UFR'd better than I thought, though I still mentally ding him for not getting enough depth on that one 3rd and long conversion that Brian said was just a perfect pass. It's 3rd and 15 -- what's a 7-yard drop gonna do except take away a dumpoff that won't reach the sticks?

Anyway I'm still higher on him today, and he's always been a guy I root for since people say he's an awesome guy and 'cause he wears 7 for his old teammate who died. Let's start grumbling about a burned redshirt on special teams in '09 (though mostly I'm just happy to see him succeeding).

jamiemac

September 12th, 2011 at 1:11 PM ^

Hawthorne is from the 2009 class. He's either a true junior or a redshirt sophomore, right?

I liked what I saw out of him. Maybe he's boom or bust like Mouton right now, but I liked seeing all the new faces contributing. Makes me hopeful that the D has a higher ceiling that originally thought

Needs

September 12th, 2011 at 1:19 PM ^

Was the TFL that Hawthorne had (where he came through the center of the ND line to tackle Wood for a 3-yard-loss) a blitz or just a great read, where the LB sees the play and reacts quickly to the ball. I really hope it's the latter, because that's a play we haven't seen a LB make for a long time.

OTOH, I thought Demens had a case of the Ezeh's out there, especially early. He seemed to be catching a lot of blocks. The LB UFR should be very interesting this week.

neoavatara

September 12th, 2011 at 12:16 PM ^

Our offense is all Denard, for better or worse.  I have no problem trying the power game here and there, but it is more a change up than a strategic plan.   I don't think having Denard under center has been disastrous as of yet.  Trying to make him Tom Brady or Chad henne has been disastrous.

They need to simplify the passing game, continue using the read option, and hope he doesn't get hurt. 

Yostbound and Down

September 12th, 2011 at 12:19 PM ^

Denard as a quarterback is not perfect. The first half and into the third quarter confirmed that, and I don't believe that it's all to be blamed on the offensive scheme, or the offensive line, or the ineffectiveness of the running game, or the wide receivers. He simply made some mistakes that he shouldn't have. 

HOWEVA Denard Robinson defines this team. He is by far the best legacy Rodriguez has left at Michigan, as he recruited this talent to play quarterback against the odds and predictions of other recruiters. He the most electrifying, mercurial talent to play at Michigan since Woodson. And he is an ambassador on and off the field that this program desperately needs now. When Denard stated that he would return to Michigan, I knew we had a chance this season no matter who ends up coaching him, because he can make up for those mistakes with a brilliance that sets him above, dare I say, any other quarterback in the country. If he wasn't already a Michigan legend by last season, Saturday's performance cemented his place in the lore of the Victors.

And so that is why the shortsighted calls for Hoke to pull him and insert Gardner need forever to stop. The team feeds off of Shoelace's charisma, enthusiasm, and determination, and yet again he has delivered. Honestly, Saturday night I never believed for a second that the Wolverines were out of it (some of that had to do with Notre Dame) because Denard has a level of something in him that can drive this team. I too can't really put it into words other than what I've already typed, because whatever it is, it is key to this team's success. We have to embrace living and dying by and with Denard on the field, because the rest of this season and next will pass too quickly, and with it his excellence, attitude, and that wonderful smile.

HAIL TO THE VICTORS!

BlueVoix

September 12th, 2011 at 12:19 PM ^

This seems really, really negative.  Like, are you trying to just make everyone feel really sad after an incredible, almost indescribable win?  Remember that in last year's Notre Dame game, Michigan didn't score for 31:24 after taking a 21-7 lead.  Michigan was also 3-16 (!) on 3rd down conversions in that game with rushers other than Denard gaining 2.4 ypc.

Maybe just revel in the magic that is Denard rather than trying to blame someone.

BlueVoix

September 12th, 2011 at 1:09 PM ^

That's fine.  I think the team has many weaknesses (and Hoke has said as much).  But this post was a bit heavy on the last-year's-Notre-Dame-game nostalgia.  We benefitted quite a bit from turnovers then and our offense was exceedingly anemic during portions of that game as well.  I see three Notre Dame games that were really bizzare and had a fantastic outcome.

Kilgore Trout

September 12th, 2011 at 12:20 PM ^

I'll admit it, I liked the piped in music.  Yeah, it didn't add to the random yelling, but I'm ok with that.  To me, the music was fun.  That was the most FUN I've had at a game ever and I think the music really was a part of that.  I'm a 32 year old who was raised on Dylan and was very impreshionable during the Nirvana / Pearl Jam era and I had so much fun with the "Dynamite" song that I decided to go home and download it.  My 65 year old uncle was grinning and singing White Stripes.  We're not ashamed.

msoccer10

September 12th, 2011 at 12:51 PM ^

That song kicked ass. After we took the lead and it came on everyone was dancing and going crazy! Then after the clock read :00 they played it again and it was perfect.

One of my biggest issues with the music in the past was the timing. I thought they did a much better job of that Saturday. They played less music in the first half and saved Lose Yourself for just one time in a big moment and then Dynamite for after we took the lead. Used 7 nation army only 2nd half when we needed big stops. I thought it all worked  pretty well, really.

08mms

September 12th, 2011 at 4:08 PM ^

I also saw several men far too old to know who jack white was singing along.  My biggest complaint is that the well used RAWK truly highlighted how terrible pop evil was.  I know several people took brief timeouts at the end of the game from screaming "Woooo" at the top of their lungs to grumble about the song post-game.  If Brandon really wants a kitzchy song that has "wolverines" in it, can he throw down the money for a real band to write and record it?

jg2112

September 12th, 2011 at 12:21 PM ^

But I hope I'm not the only one who felt a sense of foreboding in the midst of the joy and relief. 

With respect, what I felt was a sense of a coach with calm and confidence in his team, with coordinators who have the talent to paper over significant personnel issues on the field (paper thin offensive and defense lines), and with a group of players who are more concerned about winning than about their own personal statistics.

Denard just tallied the third-greatest statistical game in the history of Michigan football. Who cares whether it happened through the ground or through the air? The fact Denard has manufactured these great performances in two distinct offensive styles should in fact comfort you that Borges knows what he has, and what he's capable of.

Anyone thinking Denard would be able to run for 250 rushing yards against this great Irish front 7 was being ridiculous. That said, he still got significant yards on the ground, spread the ball around, fixed his throwing gaffes, and WON THE GAME.

Your sense of forboding should be for Gary Gray once Finnegan O'Cooke finishes his UFR at Notre Dame Nation, not Denard Robinson.

 

MI Expat NY

September 12th, 2011 at 12:34 PM ^

What exactly is replicable about the offensive performance?  Denard running well and Hemmingway catching jump balls seems to be about it.  You can't build an offense around the latter and so far Borges hasn't shown a great ability to leverage Denard's legs into an offensive system.  Until that happens, and I think there's a good chance it will, we're going to struggle against good defenses.

Brian

September 12th, 2011 at 12:38 PM ^

I could look at only what happened instead of how, sure, but then I would be pretending that downfield jump balls are a sustainable method of winning games and ignoring three terrible interceptions, all of which were from plays run from under center that saw plenty of deep help from a Notre Dame not terrified of Denard's legs. That would be blind slappydom.

dcmaizeandblue

September 12th, 2011 at 1:04 PM ^

You could look at some of Denard's decision making on some of those plays once the pocket broke down.  He had plenty of room to run on many of those plays but instead threw up a lot of deep balls.  I think he's got all the tools but you would have seen a much larger rushing number had he made a few better decisions.  Also you're description of the Smith TD shows exactly how scared ND was of Denard's legs.

Magnus

September 12th, 2011 at 1:12 PM ^

I'm not sure what your point is.

Denard threw 11 interceptions last season, and he didn't even play for chunks of time (BGSU, Illinois, Iowa, etc.) due to injury or poor play.  Denard throws interceptions because he's not a very accurate passer and not a good decision maker, not because he's playing from under center or shotgun.  Line him up in any formation, and I'm pretty sure he can throw an interception out of it.

Aequitas

September 12th, 2011 at 1:35 PM ^

"he didn't even play for chunks of time (BGSU, Illinois, Iowa, etc.) due to injury or poor play."

Huh?  When did he not play for a chunk of time due to 'poor play'?  You make it sound like he threw 11 balls directly into the defender's hands.  Hell, Roundtree alone gifted 2 of those balls last year.  Denard's accuracy is under-rated, but that doesn't mean our coordinators shouldn't use the total package that he delivers.

Denard is not the only QB who is more effective as a passer when he's on the move, but Denard, specifically, affects a defensive backfield differently than other QBs when he rolls out, or fakes a run.  You do see that don't you?

If so, and if we use your assumption, that he's "not a very accurate passer", when he DOES have to pass, wouldn't you rather have him throwing into a secondary that has one eye on Denard in fear of him running?

Needs

September 12th, 2011 at 2:52 PM ^

I thought it was Purdue.

EDIT: It was Purdue. Just checked the UFR. He was benched against Purdue after a pass that Brian gave an INX (for extremely inaccurate) [Narrative comment: "He finds Stonum open for the first down and throws it so high that Tacopants is like "wow, that's high.""] RichRod then yoyoed them for several drives before Robinson came in for good in the 4th.

 

http://mgoblog.com/content/upon-further-review-2010-offense-vs-purdue

Magnus

September 12th, 2011 at 1:51 PM ^

This is kind of a hilarious discussion.

Last year Rodriguez used "Denard play action" once or twice a game, which freed up Terrence Robinson or Roy Roundtree over the middle.

Last week Borges used "Denard play action" twice against WMU, which freed up Koger and Dileo over the middle (Dileo's pass was way behind him).

This week Borges used "Denard play action" once against Notre Dame, which freed up Junior Hemingway downfield for a huge play...and the pass was woefully inaccurate.

You people are acting as if the "Denard play action" play was a huge staple of the games last year, which they weren't.  And if you're simply talking about the pre-snap threat of Denard running the ball, then as I explained above...the play action rollout is a huge threat to any defensive end/outside linebacker who's asked to keep up with the fleet-footed Denard.

Stop fabricating issues with the playcalling just because Denard can't hit wide open receivers.

Aequitas

September 12th, 2011 at 2:06 PM ^

I didn't catch people asking for more play action, but there are more ways than that to exploit a defense using his speed, and you know it.  Quit straw-manning the issue.  It's rather simple, Denard is fast.  Denard is not a RB.  Instead of powering him into the line like a damn full back, take that opportunity to roll him out towards the line on a fake run, or roll to one side and throw back a la the Smith play...there are a bunch of uses where a defense HAS to react to him moving or they'll be killed.

Be specific about him being "benched for poor play" last year.  The game most people talk about is Illinois and he was kept out for a helmet to helmet collision on a QB keeper.

This isn't about Denard vs The Team, and it's not about one style vs another, it's about how best to use the talent we CURRENTLY HAVE to win football games.

imafreak1

September 12th, 2011 at 2:49 PM ^

You've ceased to make sense. "Powering [Denard] into the line" is exactly what RichRod did, it just worked better sometimes. Everything else you described, the roll outs, the throw backs, Borges did on Saturday.

Receivers were open all night. For a while Denard couldn't hit them. And then he set a career high for passing yards.  Which is great because even RichRod was going to have to find a way to rely less on Denard's running.

And this has you all upset.

MI Expat NY

September 12th, 2011 at 1:38 PM ^

We all knew that, the question is why then do we enhance those liabilities by putting him in a system with greater reliance on good decision making and QB accuracy?  Denard isn't going to win many games for us with his arm.  He just isn't.  We wouldn't have won this one if ND doesn't some how leave Gallon wide open playing prevent or if their corner had a pulse.  

What Borges hasn't done yet is take Denard's legs and make the whole offense better.  Unless you're lucky and have tremendous balance at all positions, offensive game planning is all about leveraging your strength to make your weaknesses better.  Whether that's having a power rushing game so dominating that when your QB performs play action, TE's and WR's are wide open (see Wisconsin), or whether your passing threat causes safeties to stay deep opening running lanes, or whether your QB is a threat to run on every play openinng up running lanes and pass routes.  Right now it looks like a combination of Denard Running plays and classic pro sets, with no congruence between the two.  We look effective with the former, not so much with the latter.

I'm not saying it's easy, Borges has gone his whole career without having to game plan that way, but it's necessary now.  I hope he figures it out, I think he will.

jg2112

September 12th, 2011 at 1:18 PM ^

So, you would've been fine with Denard overthrowing a screen pass by 8 yards had they done so out of a shotgun spread intended to set up an inverted veer play later in the game?

I don't understand this logic, but, then again, I root for the team to win, not for one player, and not for a style of offense. I humbly submit you should remember there are hundreds of thousands of Michigan fans who are in my boat. Of course, you can also choose to label us all "slappies," that's cool and all. But if this team gets to 10-0, which is now a distinct possibility, I hope you'll enjoy it even if they aren't averaging 6.5 ypc.

 

Brian

September 12th, 2011 at 1:56 PM ^

Fuck you, dude. If it's not clear to you after six years that I am rooting for Michigan to win, fuck you. I'm not going to have my fandom questioned after all the shit the past three years. Argue the points instead of psychoanalyzing someone.

As to your inane point: Denard didn't throw screens eight yards past where they should go because the offense never ran a middle screen last year, probably because Denard is 5'11" and is being asked to get the ball over the arms of a 6'6" DT. They threw flare screens and bubble screens and Denard was pretty good at those.

What we had last year was a coherent set of plays that worked well as a system. We don't know what we have this year but the I-form play action is a great example of what happens when  you don't force someone out of sound defense because you suck: your constraint plays don't work. The difference betwen this year and last year's long passing touchdowns is the defensive backs. Last year they were not even in the picture. This year they're running the WR's route for them. Unless everyone we come across is as terrible as Gary Gray that shit will not work long term.

And 10-0 is about as distinct a possibility as losing to San Diego State. Even if each Big Ten game was a coinflip that would be a 1.5% shot, and if Vegas is any judge most of those games are much worse. Or is Vegas just rooting for a system, too?

Magnus

September 12th, 2011 at 2:05 PM ^

I don't agree with your point about the passing touchdowns.

While it's true that the defensive backs were stride for stride with the receivers, the new "in" thing is the fade stop/back shoulder throw.  I'm not saying Denard made those throws on purpose (I don't know if he did or not), but it's not exactly an antiquated idea.  Those back shoulder throws are a relatively new strategy that started being used with regularity in the past few years.

Regardless of the predictability of the passes, I saw receivers running free (Hemingway, Roundtree, etc.) downfield that Denard just flat-out overthrew or threw wide.  There was a bomb in the first half, the "Denard play action" to Hemingway, the corner route to Roundtree, etc.  You don't need to do anything fancy if the basic stuff is working.  It seems to me that you're expecting a coordinator to fix all the reasons why nobody wanted Denard as a QB coming out of high school (he's not accurate, he's unpolished, makes poor decisions, etc.).

Aequitas

September 12th, 2011 at 2:23 PM ^

"You don't need to do anything fancy if the basic stuff is working.  It seems to me that you're expecting a coordinator to fix all the reasons why nobody wanted Denard as a QB coming out of high school (he's not accurate, he's unpolished, makes poor decisions, etc.)."

I respect that you have an opinion, but I don't respect that opinion.  The basic stuff doesn't work when you don't have the talent that the other team does.

As far as your comments on Denard ability at QB, they're pretty much the least insifghtful I've seen this young football season.  If you want to run a Manball offense, yeah, a 5' 11" guy isn't ideal.   Denard is a special talent and there are a ton of creative coaches out there that would kill to have him lead their offense.

Tacopants

September 12th, 2011 at 3:38 PM ^

I don't think anybody is going to argue that, but the issue is with the types of plays/routes being called.  Don't call plays that forces your QB to do things he's not good at, namely, making an accurate downfield pass to a crossing reciever.

I agree with you that the play action rollout I form is a decent use of his skills, but I think it works much less well than a play action rollout from the shotgun.  I mean, why make Denard turn his back to the field for precious secons AND also make him vulnurable to a backside blitz?  Instead, why not give him the extra time to scan downfield and hopefully make the correct decision?  I think it's fairly obvious by this point that he needs the extra time.

The playcalls were the correct ones in the formations they lined up in, but why were they lining up in I form or Ace when ND was not feeling threatened by the RB?  You might as well move into the shotgun and retain Vincent Smith's blocking/backfield recieving as an option.

Needs

September 12th, 2011 at 4:38 PM ^

I honestly can't remember any play action rollouts from the shotgun that I've seen by Michigan or anyone else. Probably just impending alzheimers, but can anyone provide examples? I remember them moving the pocket last year but that didn't feature a play action fake.

And I'm not sure how a play action roll out from the gun would work. The problem being a shotgun snap takes a certain amount of time, as does the shotgun play fake, by the time you got to the rollout, you'd really be in danger of rolling right into a defensive end that had rushed upfield, and you'd almost never have enough time to threaten the edge, which is the prime reason for a rollout. I think a play action rollout only works from under the center because it relies so heavily on misdirection. 

wolverine1987

September 12th, 2011 at 6:00 PM ^

There is absolutely nothing different between standing back and surveying the defense pre-snap, getting the ball snapped back to you, and having a key read and getting rid of the ball against a defense terrified that you are going to run--versus, taking the ball under center, backpedalling, watching your footwork, going through progressions, and throwing to receivers against a defense that has a pretty good idea you aren't running the ball that play. Yep, no difference whatsoever.

/s