Confidence in the QB situation

Submitted by iawolve on

IF (we have not seen it in a game) Forcier is as accurate as advertised, he should be able to make the 3-5 open passes per game that were missed last year. Assuming he gets those, you are at least making positive yards and building confidence. At that point, you are at least getting the benefit of him then potentially completing 3-5 additional passes due to the extra plays run, ability to drop a pass into a tighter spot and the defense having to account for a more complete offense since (I assume) the run game will improve as well.

There are two countervailing items that will determine which edge this falls off. The first issue for Tate will be taking into account the faster game speed with advanced defensive coverages and that he will lose ½ to 1 step on rushers who are must quicker than his high school ends/LBs/CBs. This fact will negate a % of plays that he is used to making. My hope is that you will not find too many rushers worse that Graham so he should be up to speed pretty quickly in spring ball. The flip side to this is his exposure from his brothers to the college game, early enrollment, having a personal coach in high school and having “it”. I don’t think you can underestimate the first three and having the confidence to perform. It is the difference between looking lost and rallying a team. It really gives him the tools to separate from the normal freshman QB.

I am not saying we win the Big Ten (a la Henne), but I could easily see 7-8 wins in the regular season assuming we use Stickum and not Pam spray on our gloves. I definitely feel multiple times more optimistic now than I did last year.

Tater

February 17th, 2009 at 11:05 AM ^

I am with you; it is not all gloom and doom. I am sticking to my original prediction of 9-3, with losses to Iowa, PSU, and Wisky.

I think that both QB's experience in the spread will make both look a lot better than last year's QB's. Also, the more panic-stricken among us don't seem to remember that UM has started freshmen before, and that last year was the exception, not the rule.

UM is a perpetual top 25 program. Last year was an aberration. It will not be repeated anytime soon. RR has done a good job of retooling his "cupboard" with his kind of players, and everyone has another year of experience.

Those six redshirted OL's won't hurt, either. They will add immediate depth, and might become a very dominant line by 2010 or 2011.

Right now, I will take Forcier and Robinson over "Pryor and Prayer" anyday.

Jay

February 17th, 2009 at 11:24 AM ^

I understand the optimism and excitement about Tate & Denard as they are both Rich Rod types of QBs (dual threat), but, to say that you would rather have two inexperienced true freshmen over a QB who was considered one of the best, if not the best recruit in the nation last year in Terrell Pryor just doesn't make much sense. Pryor also has a year of experience under his belt, too. You can discount how important that is, imho. Even if Pryor is injured and OSU is forced to go to a backup, it still isn't much different than the situation that we are in with Tate & Denard. Pryor is the only QB out of the bunch who has any experience. I fear that too many in our fanbase are putting an inordinate amount of pressure and expectations on our two true freshmen QBs. Chances are, both will struggle and both will make quite a few mistakes, especially early on.

iawolve

February 17th, 2009 at 11:46 AM ^

However, that may be tough. I don't know how their D and new skill players will respond or if Pryor escapes the full year.

I am counting wins for
West Mich (can't lose to a directional school or more MAC)
East Mich (see above)
Delaware St (I have to believe in something, this is it)
Indiana (mess)
Purdue (new coach, meh team)

I am assuming 2-3 of these 4
ND (have them at home, Fumble God might not find us)
Illinois (might be tough, depends on which Juice we get)
MSU (new QB and RB, but at home)
Wisc (at Camp Randall, but they are not showing much)

Assume a loss- HOWEVER
Iowa (nobody behind Stanzi)
PSU (nobody behind Clark)
OSU (this could swing per above)

Just as we may have depth concerns, the rest of the conference is not immune either. You give us a few breaks, this thing could bust open in a strange way. If we get broken at a few positions, then you already know how that will work out.

iawolve

February 17th, 2009 at 12:53 PM ^

Needed to add "teams" to the end of MAC. Quickly written.

Either way, it has to stop. In all honestly, not to belittle the MAC, if we can't count on beating that conference, it is really game over for us being a national power. Those games can't start being question marks when you have the Big Ten to worry about.

gater

February 17th, 2009 at 11:17 AM ^

i was thinking 6 or 7 wins, now that there is no transition period for tate or denard, unless god forbid it's using sheridan, i drop my prediction to 5 or 6 wins. i hope i'm wrong.

JRC

February 17th, 2009 at 11:20 AM ^

I'm setting my bar at about 5 wins. I realize this is a process and we're not there yet, maybe not even halfway. But if Tate's accuracy is even solid, we're not going to see him sailing the ball over players heads when they're wide open. He's going to be better passer and runner.

Route66

February 17th, 2009 at 11:25 AM ^

We will know a lot more come the spring game.......I cannot wait. Where is the tailgate going to be anyway?(I thougt there was a post about that, maybe I missed it) I would love to meet up and have a few beers with you fellas.

mweiss

February 17th, 2009 at 11:43 AM ^

I understand that Threet was some what of news and everyone is worried about the freshmen QBs. The freshmen well play great and we will finally start scoring points. I have no doubt. What I am worried about is the lack of experience and major holes that need to be filled on defense. I think we can all agree that last years offense was a disappointment but with the starters we had on defense last year we should have been winning games 14 to 7. We had some ballers on defense and we were getting torched. Alot of those players are gone and we have an unbelievable amout of possible freshmen starting on D and we have a lot to fix. We will move the ball this year with the freshmen QBs but I think the big question is can we stop it.

Ziff72

February 17th, 2009 at 11:45 AM ^

If Tate is the real deal and one of the top 10 qb's in Michigan history and he survives 12 regular season games without injury then yes we should be fine. I see little risk in that.

dex

February 17th, 2009 at 12:16 PM ^

after losing to App state and Toledo in consecutive season, we're still doing the whole "michigan can't lose to team X ever!!!" thing?

Heisman Epstein

February 17th, 2009 at 12:21 PM ^

I think Forcier's running ability will keep defenses on edge with the threat of a QB keeper. We're also going to have a lot more speedy little bastards in the mix at slot than Odoms, so the offense is definitely going to improve. Win prediction? I dunno, 7?

umjgheitma

February 17th, 2009 at 12:30 PM ^

Even though it looks like the defense is young (and it is), at least we have more options. The D-line is going to have the only real depth problem. With Cissoko, Turner, and Warren we have a pretty decent start to a defensive backfield. We have Ezeh and Mouton for our starting LB's but we have others that can come in and give us some speed and shake things up. It's really a chance for Robinson to come in and shine as a DC and gain some respect. If we can preform well with the talent and inexperience we have now I like our chances of landing Gholston, Wood, Robinson, Guy, and others in the 2010 class.

WolvinLA

February 17th, 2009 at 1:26 PM ^

Here's my 2 cents. Based on our schedule, if you could somehow play our 2008 squad through our schedule this year, we would win 5 games, not three. WMU is worse than Utah and Delaware St. is worse than Toledo, so I think we pick up one or 2 wins there. B10 teams we lost to last year, MSU, OSU, PSU, Purdue, won't be as good as they were last year.

I think our 2009 squad will be better than our 2008 squad, I think most will agree with that. Even if the QB position is a complete wash (which is near worst case scenario) our OL, WR and RB group will be improved. I think this buys us AT LEAST one more win, putting the realistic floor at 6, with the likely total being 7 or 8.

JimBobTressel-0

February 17th, 2009 at 3:49 PM ^

i want Forcier to get the pryor treatment....RB run run run run run run run run run run run run run run play action run run run run run run run run run run run run run run.

chris16w

February 17th, 2009 at 5:14 PM ^

Colt McCoy (probably the most similar quarterback to Tate in terms of style, abilities and guru ratings) started as a freshman and had success. Just saying.

colin

February 17th, 2009 at 6:31 PM ^

and be a threat to keep. That's a huge chunk of the offense right there. The zone-read + bubble package never got to the point last year where a QB could effectively do all the things required of him in that package. That's a pretty fundamental hole in the playbook to have to work around.