Five Other Encouraging Signs I Took From The Spring Game
I've read different posts about the Spring Game which have predominately (antly?) centered around Tate's passing and scrambling ability, and the Cone juke of Stevie Brown. I saw five more positive developments at the scrimmmage. Well, I saw more than five, but here are five I'm focusing on:
(5) the O-line has an attitude and is deep. The first teamers were slapping each other in the face in the sideline huddles. They (especially Molk) sprinted to the line. They opened huge holes. They all look very good. It's a good sign for 2009 that even without Barnum, one or two of the starters for the 2008 tOSU game were scrimmaging with the third team. And with what I saw, either Quentin Washington is the second coming of Orlando Pace, or GBMW is smoking something if they think the Q will get on the field ahead of 5th year seniors and a two year starter this fall.
Regardless, a good line is the key to everything - protecting the QB, giving the RBs daylight, pass protection, and keeping the offense on the field for long drives. It happened in spurts near the end of the season last year (the "Minor Drive" against tOSU, against Penn State and especially Minnesota). If the O-line can play well, that alone will reverse 2 or 3 of the losses from last year.
(4) Vlad Emilien made a good backfield tackle, and also overran a tackle for loss. Although Carlos Brown left him in the dust on the 88 yarder, Vlad looks like he gets it, and he has the safety look. This kid will be good. Cue the silly Musberger quotes in 2010.
(3) I read last year there were interceptions all over the place at the spring scrimmage. This year I don't recall Tate throwing one (which is all that matters). Forget the difference in the weather, who they practiced against and all that - the offense looked comfortable and competent. It looked 100% better than what we saw in 2008, and that was without Shaw.
(2) Vincent Smith gives Michigan five good running backs - two power guys (Minor and Cox) and three speed backs (Brown, Shaw and Smith). Fitz should be able to redshirt with this depth, and there's no reason why Michigan shouldn't be one of the best rushing teams in the nation, if number (5) above works out.
(1) Without a doubt, the highlight for me was to see Elliot Mealer on the field. After what he went through in 2007, it was great to see him play and play well. He deserves good fortune.
4 picks in the 2008 game (probably some fumbles too) vs. 0 turnovers in the 2009 game (T Rob did fumble after a catch but it was recovered by an offensive teammate). That was the stat that which brought the most comfort to me. Throw in Tate's 10 of 13 passing for 133 yards (unofficially) as well as several nice runs and I feel much better about UM's fortunes for 2009.
Co-sign on Elliot Mealer.
April 13th, 2009 at 10:49 AM ^
Tate fumbled in the endzone, and the play was whistled dead before a recovery (though it seemed the defense would have recovered). So, there were turnovers.
April 13th, 2009 at 11:23 AM ^
Yup. You are correct. One turnover.
Of course, Tate also got screwed a couple of times on runs where he was "tagged down" when a guy reached out and barely grazed him with one hand, so he could have had a much more impressive running day.
April 13th, 2009 at 11:29 AM ^
Eh - I'm skeptical on how good his running was. For every play that one touch had him down, there were some where a guy was pulling up from nailing him, and he slipped out.
April 13th, 2009 at 11:55 AM ^
...compare where he was getting tagged with where Sheridan and Threet actually got tackled last year, and tell me why Tate's running and scrambling wasn't a 150% upgrade.
April 13th, 2009 at 12:40 PM ^
tell me why Tate's running and scrambling wasn't a 150% upgrade.
Did I say it wasn't an upgrade? I don't remember saying it wasn't an upgrade. I'll look back at my post...and...nope, didn't say it wasn't an upgrade.
The person I responded to said the rules made Tate seem worse, as it nullified his scrambles. My point was that he had scrambles he otherwise wouldn't have as a result of the rules as well.
April 13th, 2009 at 12:45 PM ^
...I never said you said it wasn't an upgrade. What you said wasn't the point. My point is, the running was an upgrade. A tremendous upgrade.
The reality from the scrimmage is that Tate ran well, whether he benefited or not from the no-touch rule. If he breaks 4-6 decent to good runs a game that will make a huge difference from last year.
We agree on your second paragraph.
So then why did you respond to me with a point unrelated to what I actually said?
...the ultimate issue isn't whether Tate looks good in the scrimmage, but whether he looks good as opposed to Death 2008. I think he looks vastly improved over what we had and we should be excited about that. And I think the important point of comparison is not to wonder whether Tate would be tackled when he was tagged - at the point of "tagged" Tate may have avoided the tackle, or he may have been beheaded. But, think back to 2008 and I think we all know that Threet or Sheridan would have been tagged way sooner and way easier. So, rules of the game aside, I think that if we see Tate averaging 4 yards a rush we should be happy.
So yes we agree. GO BLUE.
April 14th, 2009 at 12:04 AM ^
I'm pretty sure I still see a couple points of contention between the two of you that need to be ironed out...
April 13th, 2009 at 10:45 AM ^
Forgot about Grady's power game.
April 13th, 2009 at 11:02 AM ^
I was pleasantly surprised about his performance. He does his job whether if it's blocking or running. He is their best short yardage back though Minor would get the primary carries at any downs. If Grady is given a role as a blocking back as well as short yardage back, he'll be fine. He looked a bit more explosive than in the past which is encouraging.
RBs is clearly one of the stronger position group on the team. There are a lot of quality depth from the top to the bottom. Minor is clearly a starter. Carlos Brown is a homerun threat. Shaw can be a homerun threat if he learn to be patient on letting the block develop. Vincent Smith is a mini Mike Hart. Grady is a power back. Then there's Fitzgerald Toussiant who looked very impressive in highlight video.
ENGLISH MOTHAFUCKA, DO YOU SPEAK IT?!
wh...what?
April 13th, 2009 at 10:48 AM ^
Because I am on the Tate bandwagon, I was very pleased with his performance Sat. But more importantly, you hit the nail on the head with the o-line. It is not rocket science that we will go how the line goes, but they did look good. They were cut, in shape, Barwisized, cut, chizzled, Chuck Norris like, and cut*. Did you see how in shape they were**?
Joking aside, like I said in a post months back, Tate's(or any somewhat talented QB's success) this year will be 75% becuase of the line. They are the QB's security blanket. They look a year older and wiser and it was comforting to see.
*excerpts from the online streaming play by play(they rode the legs off that pony)
**more of the same
April 13th, 2009 at 10:51 AM ^
1) No interceptions for the 1st team D against David Cone (throwing on the move, trying to be mobile for that matter) = disappointing.
2) I hope Cox never sees the field; he is currently our 6th best running back. Replace him with Grady, and that is a much more feasible scenario.
April 13th, 2009 at 11:00 AM ^
I think it would have been worse if the defense had actually intercepted Cone. His passes were so off target that if our defenders had been close enough to pick them off, then that means they were way out of position in the first place.
Yes, Cone's passing ability and decision making (except for the 50 yard juke run, which should have never happened) eerily reminds me of Sheridan and company 2008... YIKES.
April 13th, 2009 at 11:01 AM ^
was an oversight. He played well at the game. I hope Cox doesn't see the field either so I don't have to hear my 12-year old brother's jokes about "Mike Cox."
I agree with your point number one, but many of Cone's passes were uncatchable by anyone wearing a winged helmet. And, no Donovan Warren.
April 13th, 2009 at 12:54 PM ^
It's "predominantly."
I've seen both. I knew only one was right. I didn't want the grammar police to beat me up.
Oh wait, I'm one of those.
Well, the grammar police and the spelling police are actually two different units of the same division. I'm actually an officer on both forces. You know, the whole social science degree.
Two interceptions bounced off my man's chest. Not worried about it at this point, but he literally had the ball in his arms.
"Coach, this just doesn't look right. It looks like I jerked off an elephant or something."
That's what Tate has, he is clearly one helluva athlete. Strong accurate arm and a seemingly strong work ethic, if he can just stay healthy.