Barwis and Denard
A few things are slightly surprising to me....
The first is the apparent premature love for Mike Barwis. Some posters praise this guy so much, its as if the conditioning methods prior to him here were substandard, which to me is rather disrespectful. We were one of the most dominant football programs with our old training system, and so far we've gone 3-9 with the new one. I know, I know, that is not necessarily fair, but the point is that the over-the-top Barwis praise to me is indirectly insulting to our "old" way.
The second thing slightly surprising to me is the drastic preference of Tate Forcier over Denard Robinson for our QB this upcoming season. I'd have figured there would be equal love for both, or closer to it. Most will say it is because Forcier has traditional QB skills that Denard doesn't. Well....our offense is NOT gonna be traditional in any sense, and the skills Denard has are fantastic. From what I have seen of him, he is a sublimely clutch player, someone who you want with the ball with the game on the line. I'm not knocking Forcier, but the enthusiasm for each of them should be ALOT closer than it is here.
August 14th, 2009 at 9:47 PM ^
with that note:
GO TATE
August 14th, 2009 at 9:49 PM ^
Tate FTW!
August 14th, 2009 at 9:51 PM ^
GO GITTLESON!
August 14th, 2009 at 9:52 PM ^
This topic makes me really sad.
August 14th, 2009 at 9:53 PM ^
How do you know Denard is clutch when you have never seen him play, let alone play when the game is on the line?
I'm guessing you have also measured Denard's intangibles. Are they off the charts?
August 14th, 2009 at 9:54 PM ^
Hmmmm...our players are skinnier and stronger than they used to be. That seems to be justifiably praiseworthy.
Tate is better than Denard Robinson. He is. The sooner people understand that, the better.
Forcier is a better passer. He's also a good runner. He's also been in the system since January. He's also had a QB coach since he was in diapers.
Robinson is a lot of things, but he certainly wasn't a great high school quarterback. I don't know if you're one of those "I trust a kid's offer sheet more than Rivals or Scout" people, but if you are...Robinson came here in large part because nobody else wanted him as a QB. They wanted him as a WR or a CB.
If you ARE one of those pro-Rivals people...Robinson was ranked as an athlete. Not a quarterback.
August 14th, 2009 at 10:04 PM ^
So, what you're saying is that one guy who said Denard had throwing mechanics on par with Peyton Manning's might be exaggerating just a bit?
August 14th, 2009 at 10:23 PM ^
I agree with you and my guess is that Tate will be the better QB. However, Pat White was also an Athlete to Rivals, not a QB, and only a 3 star one to boot.
August 14th, 2009 at 10:26 PM ^
I had no idea.
August 14th, 2009 at 10:36 PM ^
Do you remember a guy named Michael Hart? He was from Syracuse, NY, and went to Michigan. He was a 3-star recruit!
August 14th, 2009 at 10:42 PM ^
I'm pretty sure he was a 5-star.
August 14th, 2009 at 10:45 PM ^
Sarcasm?
August 14th, 2009 at 10:52 PM ^
Thanks for asking.
August 14th, 2009 at 11:40 PM ^
I agree its Tate's to lose. The kid has uncanny accuracy and leadership along with a quarterback bloodline. But if there is one thing you can't teach its elite speed. Denard Robinson has that kind of speed. And correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the Florida Gators offered him at Quarterback, which taken for what its worth, should at least suggest he has viable quarterback skills. I believe in THE FORCE as much as anyone but I have zero problem with "Shoelace" Robinson taking the job at some point in the season if he is worthy of such a promotion. Either way we should be happy we finally have weapons at the QB position!
GO BLUE!!
August 14th, 2009 at 11:50 PM ^
I think the story was that Florida wanted him as an athlete. If they had offered him as a QB, that's probably where he would have gone.
(Someone correct me if I'm wrong.)
August 14th, 2009 at 11:54 PM ^
No I think you are correct good sir. They wanted him as a WR and to fill that Percy Harvin ATH role.
August 15th, 2009 at 1:23 AM ^
I was almost sure he got offered as a QB but either way my only point I wanted to make is that we all should be happy that we have depth and viable weapons at the quarterback position albeit young, and inexperienced. Thanks for correcting me
GO BLUE
August 15th, 2009 at 10:09 AM ^
They initially said they wanted him as an ATH, and then said they'd bring him in as a QB when they realized he'd go somewhere else. The thing that swayed him to Michigan as that Florida didn't offer Witty.
August 15th, 2009 at 10:08 AM ^
Florida did offer Denard as a QB. Just sayin'.
August 14th, 2009 at 9:56 PM ^
if Denard enrolls early then they are praised the same. Tate has a leg up because hes been with the team about 6 months longer.
August 15th, 2009 at 12:08 PM ^
i disagree... alot of people seem to be sour on his mechanics, and keeping pushing him to cb. he is gonna be fun to watch.
August 14th, 2009 at 10:00 PM ^
I could give a shit less who plays, I just want wins.
Oh and Barwis is really legit.
August 15th, 2009 at 12:07 PM ^
Am not denying that Barwis is legit. I think he is, too. That wasn't the point.
August 14th, 2009 at 10:00 PM ^
Our old S&C methods were outdated! It has been widely perceived(By every one that isn't a M fanatic) that Recruits come to M to get slower. This mostly because of the top recruiting talent of past years, but that not translating to the field! I, for one, am glad to have a S&C program that pushes the team to the limits. If you have played sports, you know; The harder you practice, the easier the game! Long as we win, I could care less about the QB! We could line Will Campbell up in a form of the Wild Hokie that VA Tech uses, as long as we are winning!!!
August 14th, 2009 at 10:02 PM ^
I don't think Michigan fans prefer Tate over DRob because Tate has "Traditional QB skills", it's more like Tate has been on campus since January, went through spring ball with the team, has a better grasp of the offense, (At this point), has mad passing skills along with running ability, and has basically been groomed to be a QB since like 6 months of age.
DRob will get his chances this year, and I can hardly wait to see it.
August 14th, 2009 at 11:57 PM ^
tate is well ahead of DR in the passing game even before the early enrollment of tate. if a qb is only(mostly)able to run it becomes just so much easier to stop them. if they also have the ability to pass (A la tate) then the entire offense opens up.
August 15th, 2009 at 4:55 AM ^
Not to say you're wrong (I think the fact that Tate has had a QB coach since age 2 means he's probably a more polished QB) but your argument works just as well in reverse. If a QB runs well, it opens up the pass. If a QB passes well, it opens up the run.
The real argument here is whether Tate is a good enough runner to capitalize on what his passing game opens up vs. whether Dennard is a good enough passer to capitalize on what his running game opens up.
August 15th, 2009 at 12:06 PM ^
yeah, and so did Todd Marinovich.
August 15th, 2009 at 12:19 PM ^
Todd Marinovich was NCAA first team all-freshman, and the NCAA freshman of the year. I'll take that.
August 14th, 2009 at 10:03 PM ^
The conditioning of the players wasn't up to par before Barwis arrived.
They needed something a little more innovative and that's what Barwis has brought to the program.
Secondly, Forcier is the more polished QB and he also committed early. Robinson is playing catch up right now.
Don't understand your gripe at all.
August 15th, 2009 at 12:04 PM ^
All I said was that I am slightly surprised of the Tate love vs the Denard love, and would have figured that it would be alot closer in value than it is amongst the collective posters here. I can understand more love for Tate, but not to the extent that it is. Robinson is a great recruit, a different skill set player than Tate, but a great one nonetheless.
August 14th, 2009 at 10:07 PM ^
Did you just insult the Barwis? Your epinion means nothing then!
August 14th, 2009 at 10:09 PM ^
should be exactly what we individually choose it too be. Henson or Brady? Demetrius Brown or Michael Taylor? Threet or - wait - nevermind that one.
I want all the kids to do their best. With that said, whoever gives us the best chance to win is who gets my support. Unless we have a Threet Sheridan 2008-type disaster, I am going to assume that whoever is under center is the best guy right now.
Unless our team reverts to the old, gassed-in-the-4th-quarter ways, I'll take the bad - ass new trainer, tyvm. It's otherwise just a fresh blood thing. Fresh blood as in it's usually dripping from his jaws after he bites the head off a Chupacabra. Gittleson never did THAT.
August 14th, 2009 at 10:14 PM ^
Arg, stop trying to create a fraction within the fan community between Tate and Denard! We hope they're both great! The both play for Michigan, we should support them both and not disparage either before even taking a snap in a game.
August 14th, 2009 at 10:20 PM ^
Which fraction gets your goat?
August 14th, 2009 at 10:28 PM ^
Zing!
Are you in the Tate/Denard > 1 fraction, or the Tate/Denard 1?
(Please don't answer!)
August 14th, 2009 at 10:26 PM ^
Also the fact that 50,000 people saw Tate dismantle the vaunted Michigan second string defense could be why the fan base is more excited about him.
August 14th, 2009 at 10:34 PM ^
I'm sorry, the old program was outdated. While I agree with you that around these parts Barwis mania sometimes gets out of control, a football S&C program that doesn't even use squats and hang cleans is an obsolete one. Your argument that the old program was a good one because the team won with it isn't a good argument because the players could have been winning before in spite of the old program, not as a result of it, which I believe is what was happening. Our recruits and coaching were just so much better than everyone we were still able to do well.
August 14th, 2009 at 10:49 PM ^
I think if you watch any player you can see the difference especially in the lineman! The oline looks freaking amazing. Look at tape of the most recent teams under Gittleson. Can I say Beer Guts! Maybe not that bad but the O-Line was about weight and power alone. Not it is about being a superior athlete. Jake Long was the oddity on the old line now players in that type of shape will be the norm! I hope they can have Long type success not just looks.
August 14th, 2009 at 10:52 PM ^
This isn't a real post. Can't be.
August 14th, 2009 at 11:06 PM ^
But if he's trolling it's a smooth, subtle troll. Nearly fluent English, and some hint of background knowledge make this one a tough call.
August 14th, 2009 at 11:37 PM ^
+1 for making me LOL WildcatBlue.
August 14th, 2009 at 11:25 PM ^
hey Meeechigan Dan, why did you make Kevin Youkilis your Avatar?
August 15th, 2009 at 5:40 PM ^
That's the Lieutenant of Morgul and he's much better looking.
August 15th, 2009 at 6:45 PM ^
sarcasm
August 14th, 2009 at 10:57 PM ^
"Some posters praise this guy so much, its as if the conditioning methods prior to him here were substandard, which to me is rather disrespectful."
wat
August 14th, 2009 at 11:46 PM ^
After a blowout loss in the 07 Fiesta Bowl to West Virginia, Oklahoma head coach Bob Stoops said afterwards that the West Virginia players were stronger, faster, and more explosive at the point of attack. As we know, Barwis was the WVU strength and conditioning coach. It doesn't happen overnight, but players that are in the Barwis system all 4 years are generally freak athletes or beasts i.e (owen schmitt). Strength and conditioning doesn't win you games, execution does. But i'll tell ya what; it sure the hell doesn't hurt!!!
GO BLUE
August 14th, 2009 at 11:54 PM ^
i heard you like pizza, dawg. so i put a pizza in your pizza so you can eat while you eat.
August 14th, 2009 at 11:54 PM ^
Best be careful when talking about Barwis. We burn witches 'round these parts.