denard robinson

Submitted by Mr_South_Beach on
has to be the fastest qb in the country so my question is if he picks up the offense quickly , no matter what tate does in the spring or summer will denard get the start against western michigan ?
MGoBoard

mblood7

March 29th, 2009 at 2:37 AM ^

I'm on your side I am a Firefighter/Paramedic. I have the upmost respect for plumbers, electricians ect. saying it's obvious the people who didn't go to Michigan sounds cocky. That's not what i'd expect from someone so prestige as a michigan alum.

Joined: 03/22/2009

MGoPoints: 1126

McFarlin

March 29th, 2009 at 2:25 AM ^

I think Denard won't beat Tate. Tate is just too polished of a passer and is just about as fast as Denard. Denard is a great kid but I think his future is at CB.

Joined: 03/27/2009

MGoPoints: 3

McFarlin

March 29th, 2009 at 2:33 PM ^

I never said Tate was. I'm just saying that people don't give Tate his props. He runs a 4.55 on Rivals and many people have him running faster. I try not to use Rivals on 40 times because they are pretty far off on a lot of guys. However, after looking at Tates highlights I can say that he def has more than enough speed. He is pretty elusive and I wouldn't be shocked if he runs a 4.4. Now Denard is prolly faster but not by much. Denard didn't look as elusive in his highlight tape or as good as a passer. But I honestly know that both run a 4.4 or a 4.5. So one really isn't much faster then the other.

Joined: 03/27/2009

MGoPoints: 3

Magnus

March 29th, 2009 at 2:52 PM ^

Tate Forcier does not run a 4.4. You don't believe what Rivals lists...so you lower his speed by .15 seconds? Denard Robinson just ran a 10.44 in the one hundred meters. I'm not saying Tate Forcier is slow, but Denard Robinson has blazing speed. You didn't help your case with this post.

Joined: 07/17/2008

MGoPoints: 166230

McFarlin

March 29th, 2009 at 4:32 PM ^

You certainly didn't help your case either. Okay, let's go by Rivals. Tate runs a 4.55 and Denard runs a 4.49. Now you really think Denard is so much faster? If Denard is really so fast then why did Tate make Denard's highlight runs look like shit? I could care less what Denard runs in the 100 meter. That has nothing to do with the 40 yard dash. NOTHING! Like I said, I'm sure Denard may be faster in shorts and on a track, but Tate has more football speed. Period. Look at the highlight films. Lastly, why would you go off of Rivals?

Joined: 03/27/2009

MGoPoints: 3

McFarlin

March 29th, 2009 at 5:25 PM ^

Okay, lets make this simple for you. ABOUT AS FAST means just that. Tate is ABOUT as fast as Denard. Does not mean he is FASTER. God you are the fucking moran. Your life= Pointless

Joined: 03/27/2009

MGoPoints: 3

Sommy

March 29th, 2009 at 5:49 PM ^

So, apparently everyone missed the part where this dude actually said "Denard doesn't look faster than Tate." Uh, yeah, he does. It's pretty obvious in his highlight videos that once he hits the secondary, he's gone. I don't think I saw a single highlight where Tate actually outruns a defensive back.

Joined: 07/29/2008

MGoPoints: 1806

Sommy

March 30th, 2009 at 3:18 AM ^

Nobody said Tate isn't fast. Everyone is saying Denard is faster, because he is. You're like a child to not understand this. For the record, being a successful running QB has a lot more to do with having good vision and instincts than speed, which is apparent on a lot of Tate's runs. Yes, he's fast, but he's not even significantly faster than many of the high school players on the same field as him.

Joined: 07/29/2008

MGoPoints: 1806

dundee

March 29th, 2009 at 9:26 AM ^

speed is all relative. game speed is not neccessarily the same as speed in t-shirt and shorts running a timed 40. i'll take the slower 40 guy as long as he plays faster and makes better throws come game time.

Joined: 03/29/2009

MGoPoints: 29

McFarlin

March 29th, 2009 at 4:55 PM ^

K. Then how come Tate is rated as the most accurate QB in the country? You think they just go off complete percentage? Nope! It's called Combines. Scouts over and over said that Tate was the most accurate QB. He can do it all. I don't care, anyone that completes 77 percent of their passes has earned my respect. You think Denard played better opponents? San Diego isn't a good area for football? I would of never guessed... I didn't see Denard on ANY of the rivals or scout rankings. He's an ATH with a decent arm. Nothing more!

Joined: 03/27/2009

MGoPoints: 3

Ghost of Graham

March 29th, 2009 at 5:10 PM ^

I never said "Tate's accuracy is overrated because his opponents sucked". What I did say was meant to convey the idea that "Tate killed Denard in completion percentage, and is definitely a more accurate passer, but based on the level of competition each player faced, the gap is probably not as wide as the stats would indicate". Is that clear enough for you? And while I might be wrong on this, I believe Denard played at the highest level of high school football in Florida, while Tate's league was third tier or so in California. Florida > California. 1st tier > 3rd tier. End of story.

Joined: 03/27/2009

MGoPoints: 25

McFarlin

March 29th, 2009 at 5:17 PM ^

Wow. You are really something special. Denard wasn't even ranked in the top 10 for Rivals or Scout for the FASTEST QB. Put stats aside. Let's look at pure skills. Rivals and Scout have a top ten for most Accurate, Strongest Arm, and fastest and Denard was in zero of them. The fact that you are saying Denard is even close to Tate is amusing. Please stop. I can't take it!!! LMFAO!!

Joined: 03/27/2009

MGoPoints: 3

Ghost of Graham

March 29th, 2009 at 5:27 PM ^

Are you high? Please show me where I was talking about speed. My argument was about the level of competition they faced in high school (which you obviously know nothing about) and now you are turning it into some other twisted argument that I don't fully comprehend. Nice work dude.

Joined: 03/27/2009

MGoPoints: 25