The Brandon Peters Decision

Submitted by MGoVoldemort on October 8th, 2017 at 10:28 AM
Like most everyone on the board, my knee-jerk reaction to O'Korn last night belonged nowhere near civil society. That being said, my more calm, rational perspective having returned this morning, I still think it's time for the Peters era to begin at Michigan. So much so that I can't convince myself that there's a tangible reason for O'Korn to still be the starter. What say you?

Comments

BassDude138

October 8th, 2017 at 11:18 AM ^

The defense was exhausted by that point after holding OSU to basicaly nothing the entire game, despite our offense going three and out the entire second half. Can't expect a defense to play that much and not eventually tire and give up a big play.

If the offense was able to get one more first down against Iowa and OSU last year, those are both wins. If the offense was able to do just about anyting other than turn the ball over last night, that is a win.

The personel isn't capable of playing the way that the offensive coaches want, but they aren't creative enough to use what they have and figure out a way to make something happen.

Toby Flenderson

October 8th, 2017 at 12:39 PM ^

The offense controls the pace of the game. When you have the ball, you can decide to slow down and huddle if your team is tired, or run a no huddle. You can dictate whether you want to call plays that take a long time to develop, or quick slants. The offense has more autonomy that way. In addition, a defense is reacting to the offense which exerts more effort. 

hazardc

October 8th, 2017 at 5:39 PM ^

Yeah, our defense is WAY WAY WAY elite when you consider how absolutely abhorent our offense has been. Our defense could be ranked #1 and still be underrated, IMO. 

 

This is why I had no qualms about the way we played that game last week in 90+ degree heat.  We had to keep the defense fresh enough to finish out the game strong. It was sound strategy, and I didn't see many of our guys suddenly cramping up... All we had to do in that weather was play a game of attrition... it worked.

 

5-0 turnover ratio and we lose by 4-points.  That's very F'n impressive from the defense. 

 

 

 

 

funkywolve

October 8th, 2017 at 1:25 PM ^

It's an indictment of the S&C program. With 10 minutes to go in the 4th quarter OSU's offense had only been on the field for 20 minutes. The UM offense had been on the field 30 minutes. As to your point about the the 3 and outs in the second half, that is false. For the first 20 minutes of the second half, the UM defense had only been on the field seven and a half minutes. In fact, of the 9 possessions UM had in the second half and OT only 2 were 3 and out.

Google and the internet can be your friend. You can look up the box score and play by play from the game so you can get your facts straight before you post.

Toby Flenderson

October 8th, 2017 at 11:18 AM ^

He turned the ball over three times, once in the red zone, one was a pick6, and the other lead to a touchdown. We were up 17-7 late in the 3rd Quarter driving...and you blame the defense? Shame on you, WIlton Speight is not good, John O'Korn is not good and the offense is our achilles heel. 

Michigan4Life

October 8th, 2017 at 8:30 PM ^

wasn't on Speight since it was on the OL for letting a free rusher go through.

2nd turnover was a bad exchange between Cole and Speight. It's a killer to turn the ball over at the 1.

2nd INT was a result of a specatular play by Jerome Baker. He had to climb up the stair to get that INT. He tried to fit in a tight window over Baker and into Darboh's path. I don't think it was a bad decision since there's space to the right of Darboh. Just a specatular play by Baker.

Speight consistently kept plays alive with his pocket mobility and reset his feet to make his throws. They couldn't move the ball against an elite defense. OSU was top 5 in both FEI and S&P ratings. To expect Michigan to move the ball on them is unrealistic considering they have NFL players in every positions.

Biggest blame lies on the OL who couldn't keep Speight clean and the run game (2.1 ypc, I mean hello).

Fezzik

October 8th, 2017 at 4:40 PM ^

lol effectively beat? Dude take your moral victories elsewhere. I wouldn't call a pick 6, another interception, and a goal line fumble effective either. Speight has a serious injury and struggled before injury. Hard to say if he comes back, transfers, or never plays again. 2 previous shoulder surgeries (one in HS) and now 3 fractured vertebrae...I'd respect him either way if he continues to play or hangs up his cleats.

Logan88

October 8th, 2017 at 10:40 AM ^

He's a RS Junior who has a history of injuries and isn't very good. I would be surprised if he isn't given the firm handshake treatment after this season. This assumes that Peters doesn't transfe; if Peters does transfer UM will have almost no choice but to bring Speight back just to have enough scholarship QB's who aren't true freshmen on the roster.

How the hell is UM in this situation at QB?

pmark1210

October 8th, 2017 at 10:49 AM ^

if the presumed starter next year cannot beat out Speight and jok. at this point, I guarantee Speight is NOT given the firm handshake. the only qbs on the roster next year have a combined 3 snaps experience. all by the guy who can't muster up enough confidence to call a play in the huddle with a little authority. like my boy Christian bale said, don't just stare at her, eat her! " quit pussy footing around peters and take the bull by the fucking horns.

evenyoubrutus

October 8th, 2017 at 10:59 AM ^

Seems at this point like it was a tactical error to move Gentry to TE. It seems odd to think that he couldn't have turned into a good if not great QB under Harbaugh's coaching by now. He was a fringe top 100 guy and obviously an elite athlete. So we went that first year without signing a quarterback and there was nothing else on the roster to work with. That's why.

I Like Burgers

October 8th, 2017 at 12:00 PM ^

Let me try and follow your logic here...you’re saying Harbaugh should have kept Gentry (No. 175 on the 247 composite) at QB because he hasn’t been able to develop Peters (No. 64) or McCaffrey (No. 123) well enough. So whatever magic he wasn’t able to work on Peters or McCaffrey was somehow going to work with Gentry, the lowest rated of the three.

Kevin13

October 9th, 2017 at 9:43 AM ^

should be gone after this year. He is not the future for this team and it is time to move on and start playing the younger guys and putting together a team that can compete for a long time. Next year either Peters or McCaffery should be the starting QB and hopefully some of the young OL start to come into form and improve our play there.

Not sure why our OL is so bad, but the play has been terrible. I have even been dissappointed with Cole. It might be time to move him back to center and see if Bredeson can move out to LT. Then let Runyon/Kugler/Ruiz battle it out for LG. I would for now start JBB at RT.