A frustrated fan's observations
I know that there will be a ton of post-loss "should we keep or fire RR" posts. This is not one of those, although the discussion will involve many of the same point.
The following are my observations of our team, including our coaching staff.
1. Our defense is pathetic. It's a fact. At the same time, our defense is incredible young and as thin in the 2 deap as any I have ever seen. When Mouton went down, I actually had to think for a minute or so to figure out who would replace him. Same goes for Floyd. I would like to see us play better, but I just don't think that it is reasonable to expect the coaches to take what we have and craft much of a defense.
So what portion of the D is on the coaches? Tacking. It is horrible, and this IS on the coaching. Someone teach these kids the concept of tackling. Also, Demens was a marked improvement over Obi. Why the hell has he not been playing?? These are on GERG. Also, our defensive recruiting over the past three years has not been adequate. Some bad breaks, sure, but RR has not done well in recruiting on this side of the ball.
2. Denard is a great potential talent, but remains VERY raw in the passing game. Not a knock on our favorite be-dreaded QB. He is fast as hell, but teams are going to follow the MSU / Iowa blueprint and force him to beat them with his arm. He did great early in the year, but all of those games were against crappy defenses. He has struggled mightily against the past 2 defenses. THis is a concern.
Tate, by comparison, looked like much more of a QB out there, and played with great poise and effectiveness. This is not to advocate benching Denard for Tate - but, why hasn't RR figured out yet that he has 2 good players, and can use both as Urban Meyer did with LEak and Tebow. Hell, play both at the same time on sets. THe bottom line is that having these 2 guys is a HUGE advantage, and neither should be relegated to backup.
3. The penalties. If they were on the defensive side of the ball, I would say that this is largely youth. And some were. But many were on the offense. THis is on RR. Bad coaching leads to excessive penalties, and we have had a ton of penalties.
These are just my thoughts. Feel free to agree / disagree. I am not advocating for firing RR, but at the same time, if he cannot beat a single quality team this season, then are we really making much progress? I am frustrated by how bad we looked these past two weeks, and I am not convinced that we will be any better after the bye. I welcome all thoughts. . .
October 16th, 2010 at 11:24 PM ^
the special teams. The out-of-bounds kickoffs were absolute killers. Also, what was up with the return on the blocked FG? How come no Michigan player seemed to realize that it was a live ball? Playing until the whistle is one of the most fundamental parts of the game. Very frustrating.
October 16th, 2010 at 11:29 PM ^
That and RRs decision to punt at the end of the half really had me fuming. As bad as when RR punted at the end of the MSu game.
October 16th, 2010 at 11:29 PM ^
I was going to put something about special teams, but forgot.
2 kicks out of bounds? 2? At critical times? And the FGs? I have never seen such bad special teams play in my life. The punt and kick return blocking is also pathetic.
By the way, the players not realizing that the ball was live is entirely on the coaches. It wasn't 1 player - it was all of them. Poor coaching.
October 16th, 2010 at 11:35 PM ^
it was totally weird. The whole team was kind of walking off the field while the Iowa guy was standing over the ball and the ref stood there looking at it (and not blowing his whistle). I was screaming for someone to tackle the guy which, of course, they eventually did - at the freakin' 50 yard line! You're completely right - that is on the coaches. Sigh.
October 17th, 2010 at 12:00 AM ^
Yeah, and surprise surprise who's the special teams coach? Gibby!!!
October 17th, 2010 at 12:37 AM ^
Holy snikes. Are both of you really trying to blame the kicking out of bounds on the coaches? I'm willing to bet every penny I have that not once has a ST coach or RR told the kicker to kick the ball out of bounds. I'm pretty sure it's more of less, "kick it far, hopefully endzone". Give me a break.
October 17th, 2010 at 9:26 AM ^
I think RR even said something in his presser about how those kicks hadn't been out of bounds during the practices and it was surprising to him.
Also, the blocked FG was frustrating (for not being 3 points, etc) and it would have been a much better play to get down to the loose ball, but the team did pause to see what Iowa would do - Sash just had a lot of room to run. I'm not sure they would have stopped him much earlier if they'd gone after him right away. A field goal is not well-designed to stop or even contain a return if blocked.
October 17th, 2010 at 5:36 AM ^
It says a lot when one of our best special teams plays during the game was a kickoff that went for a touchback.
October 16th, 2010 at 11:25 PM ^
Keep the faith.
1. agree entirely and say what you want about the youth but I can't see Greg Robinson getting this defense anywhere near competent. I would welcome his departure from the program.
2. was saying this all the way back to the car. Denard needs to be a Jeremy Maclin type player who we just put anywhere on the field we can get him. Denard even as a decoy is better than Denard on the bench. Tate is clearly a competent quarterback who deserves playing time, but I am by no means saying we should sit Denard.
3. Also was disappointed in the penalties, obviously particularly in Taylor Lewan. You have to keep a level head in big games like that.
October 16th, 2010 at 11:37 PM ^
that this analysis is patently flawed.
Denard plays QB and gives you your best chance to win. Period.
I hope you advocated for Tate, clearly a quality player, during the Tate to transfer rumors...but I doubt it.
"say what you want about the youth"...Jesus Christ himself couldn't make that defense any better than GERG and his hair.
October 16th, 2010 at 11:51 PM ^
Why is it such a terrible idea to have both Tate and Denard on the field? Tate is the clear better passer, hands down. I've supported both players at every point during the entire careers. I did have faith that Tate would stay because I know he is a gamer who doesn't give up. Transferring wouldn't be something he would do. And after seeing Demens play today after watching Obi struggle the entire year, are you really convinced that GERG knows entirely who should be playing? I understand the talent level is not there. The experience is not there. I'm not that irrational. All I want is for Michigan to be put in the best postion to win on a game to game basis. Everybody has their opinions on how that will get done, but by no means do I support the team any less than you do.
October 17th, 2010 at 1:00 AM ^
I wouldn't say Tate is "clearly" the better passer. He threw two interceptions today. Whether they were playing from behind, that's two interceptions.
Also, what makes you so sure Denard would have the same level of effectiveness if teams weren't afraid of him passing? The passes he's thrown over the heads of linebackers from Notre Dame, UConn, etc. open up some pretty significant lanes for him. He wouldn't do the same things from the running back position. Similar to Michael Vick, you have to consider his running ability to be a complement to his throwing ability, and part of his throwing repertoire, because it changes the way the defense acts around the quarterback. You can't take his running ability out of context and say he'd be doing the same things elsewhere.
October 17th, 2010 at 1:11 AM ^
Just because he lines up at receiver or running back doesn't mean he wouldn't pass. And even if he was at qb with tate lined up outside, your telling me teams wouldn't have to respect his speed? And if they decided to just say screw it and not cover guys when he got the ball whats the difference between him having it from the start of the play or at some other point during it? I'll be surprised we haven't seen a formation with both of them on the field at some point. Too much talent between those two to have either one of them on the bench.
October 18th, 2010 at 1:25 AM ^
Did you see what happened last year, when he wasn't a threat to throw? Teams could just not cover receivers and go all-out trying to tackle Denard. They succeeded often enough. Denard's threat to pass (which is a threat) is very important to what he's doing.
October 17th, 2010 at 1:52 AM ^
Both quarterbacks have shown they can turn the ball over. However, by using them both during the game that will cut down on our turnovers???
It's the turnovers that are killing us. We have two sophomore quarterbacks and they are going to make mistakes. If our defense was stronger, people would be more forgiving of our offensive mistakes.
We're 5-2 and we have won the games we were supposed to win.
October 16th, 2010 at 11:51 PM ^
if GERG leaves the program? It seems to me that good players do not want to play for programs that oust their coaches every 3 years. I do see this defense be competent in a couple years. Keeping our freshmen in the program is step 1. GERG may not be able to put together a great defense but getting rid of him now does more harm than good.
October 17th, 2010 at 1:23 AM ^
Assistant coaches come and go. Texas in 2005 was on its third DC in three years, and won the national title. Given that GERG does not actually do any recruting (he's our recruiting coordinator), I don't think it would have a huge impact if he were to leave or be replaced.
October 17th, 2010 at 9:24 AM ^
The question is: how can we recruit quality defensive players if GERG doesn't leave the program? At some point we have to stop finding excuses for him. We have the worst defense in the country and to me there's no excuse for that. I don't care about his 2 Super Bowl rings; the game has passed him by. You don't believe me, ask the Syracuse fans.
Players these days want to go were the best coaches are. We keep asking ourselves: how come nobody comes to Michigan? We can almost guaranty PT. I ask you the same question: why will you choose U of M over let's say a Community College? The answer is simple. The quality of the faculty and the better education you receive here. Is GERG the best defensive coach we can have?
I'm sorry guys but there is no reason to keep GERG here. Some of you will say that the defense will have to learn a new system again. To be honest with you this time I hope they do.
October 16th, 2010 at 11:52 PM ^
if GERG leaves the program? It seems to me that good players do not want to play for programs that oust their coaches every 3 years. I do see this defense be competent in a couple years. Keeping our freshmen in the program is step 1. GERG may not be able to put together a great defense but getting rid of him now does more harm than good.
October 16th, 2010 at 11:25 PM ^
The penalties killed me. I can handle young players making mistakes, but the false starts, late hits and facemasks are pathetic
<br>
<br>Also, we should not attempt another FG this year. With how good our offense is and how bad our defense is, traditional logic is out the window. If we lose by 3 points I'm positive we could point to plays on both sides that cost us the game. In other words, special teams isnt going to win/lose a game for us. It's time to get the mentality that we will only go for it or punt
October 17th, 2010 at 9:52 AM ^
Somebody please teach the fg kickers to put some elevation on the kicks outside of extra points. Odoms could have blocked the ones we've had blocked this year.
October 17th, 2010 at 7:34 AM ^
were made by young players. Lewan had three with two false starts. Maybe the false starts had to do with him being a RS freshman and having the best DE in the Big 10, who could easily be playing in the NFL now, across from him.
As for some of the other concerns of the OP, do you really think they haven't taught these players how to tackle? That's done from youth football on up, but it takes execution. Same thing with play until you hear the whistle. Coaches can coach until their blue in the face, but the players have to perform on game day.
If there is one thing I will blame on the coaches, it was putting Obi in the game. The D had 3 and outs on the first two series and then Obi comes in and gets pancaked in the hole on the first play. He should have never been put in the game, but since he was he needed to be pulled immediately after that and wasn't. Next play another Iowa first down and Obi's still in the game.
October 16th, 2010 at 11:26 PM ^
without beating a quailty team. I would say that is progress.
October 16th, 2010 at 11:53 PM ^
Or the schedule got easier? (A little of both, probably).
October 17th, 2010 at 12:42 AM ^
Do you think our schedule got easier? Penn State is likely worse this year, but I think every other team on our Big Ten schedule this year is better than last year, and our OOC slate is tougher this year as well. OSU and Iowa are about the same, but Wisky, MSU and Illinois are better, I think Indiana is better and Purdue is about the same.
The next three games will tell if we're better than last year or not. We lost to those teams last year, we have a chance to win some or all of them this year.
October 17th, 2010 at 2:10 AM ^
We've done the exact same thing; so those teams don't matter. It is the next 3 that do. Illinois? Looks better, but we get them at home. But then they couldn't look worse last year and still waxed us. Purdue is on the road, but with all the injuries, certainly seems like they gave to be worse. But the only BIG change is Penn State. "Seems worse"? They were one of the top teams in the country last year, and now they're horse shit. And we may still lose to them.
<br>
<br>The whole idea with 8-4 sounding pretty good going into the season was that we would have to beat MSU, Iowa, or PSU (with Wisconsin and OSU possible, but unlikely) to get there, and that would at least mean we took somebody with a pulse down. Now with Penn State being rancid, 8 wins just got devalued a bit.
October 16th, 2010 at 11:28 PM ^
The last two years we haven't beaten the crappy teams. This year we have/will. Next year (and forever after that) we will beat quality teams as well. You don't put the roof on until you've laid the foundation. If we win one more game this year, that will be progress (and I think we'll do better than that).
To your actual points:
1. Yes. Defense not good. Look at roster. See why. Demens is halfway through his sophomore season of eligibility and will likely be the starter from here on out. That is about as fast as a guy can develop.
2. Having talented young QB's is a big positive. I agree. Both are true sophomores and will only get better. The wacky 2 QB formation stuff has been covered to death on this board so I will just say that I wouldn't mind some sort of rotation but that playing them both at the same time is kind of a waste of an athlete in a position he is comfortable with (i.e. a receiver running routes rather than Tate/Denard).
3. We had 30 more yards in penalties than Iowa. Where did this ridiculous concern come from (and it isn't just you expressing it)? Anyone who thinks 30 yards difference in penalties had an impact on the outcome of the game (as opposed to say -4 in turnover margin which makes victory basically impossible in the NFL where the teams are all pretty evenly matched) is barking up the wrong tree.
October 16th, 2010 at 11:37 PM ^
It's not the penalty yardage, it was the timing of the penalties. They killed drives
October 16th, 2010 at 11:38 PM ^
you are hitting the high points tonight.
October 16th, 2010 at 11:39 PM ^
make some other gaffes?
His personal foul killed the 2nd drive. And, of course, he had the personal foul in the ND game that gave away 15 free yards to the ND kick return with only about 20 seconds left.
Did I miss something? I couldn't find any other penalties on him on the espn play-by-play chart.
October 16th, 2010 at 11:47 PM ^
The entire disparity (30 yards) between us and Iowa with respect to penalty yardage was accounted for by Lewan (freshman o-lineman) being too agressive after one play (after which he was benched for quite some time) and Floyd touching a receiver's facemask as he wrestled him down out of bounds.
I for one can't believe how badly the coaches fucked this up!
October 16th, 2010 at 11:48 PM ^
A critical offsides call.
October 17th, 2010 at 7:39 AM ^
but, once again, he's a RS freshman playing against a SR. who is the best DE in the Big 10. The penalty your thinking of late in the game was against IU not ND and the coaches stated after watching film that they didn't see anything on film to warrant that penalty.
October 17th, 2010 at 1:09 AM ^
I really don't think beating a hapless Purdue/Illinois/PSU could count as progress. There has been no progress in terms of competing with quality Big Ten teams this year.
October 17th, 2010 at 1:46 AM ^
LOL. That is all.
October 17th, 2010 at 3:16 AM ^
Considering that we lost to all of them last year, I would call that progress. Apparently we have different definitions of progress. Mine relates to the team moving forward, while yours relates to... muffins? Seriously, I don't think you know what that word means.
October 17th, 2010 at 3:24 AM ^
This is ridiculous. Michigan went 1-7 in Big Ten play last year and was DEAD LAST in the Big Ten standings. To go 4-4 and finish in the middle of the standings is definite progress.
What has people steamed is that they expected Michigan to compete with some of the Big Ten's big dogs this year (MSU and Iowa) and they've been beaten handily by both. Close losses to MSU and Iowa would have gone a long way to calm the faithful.
October 17th, 2010 at 7:51 AM ^
We left 21 points on the field against State and lost by 17. Had a FG blocked and fumbled in the red zone against Iowa and lost by 10. Throw in three more TO's in the Iowa game besides the lost fumble.
Florida's lost three games already and according to the recruiting services might have had the greatest recruiting class ever last year. It's called youth and inexperience. If you can't see the progress of the team that's on you. Next year almost the whole team returns including Woolfolk to give our secondary some senior leadership.
October 17th, 2010 at 12:10 PM ^
Everyone does that when we lose: "We could've scored so much more if this, this, this and also that went well." But if you see it the other way, State could've easily hung 50 on us.
October 17th, 2010 at 12:33 PM ^
LOL. That is all.
October 16th, 2010 at 11:29 PM ^
1. Our offense is pretty good. It'll be killer in the next few years
2. Greg Robinson was Iowa's best offensive player today. Sorry, I just don't think it's all the players' fault. I just don't think he's the guy for the job.
3. Our kicking game is still piss poor. Not so much punting, but everything else kicking-wise.
4. DAMN did it get loud late in the game. Too bad it couldn't have been like that all game.
October 16th, 2010 at 11:32 PM ^
Im still scratching my head on why they hired greg robinson in the first place. Look at his track record, he has NEVER had a dominate defense. Are you telling me HE was the best guy we could get?
October 16th, 2010 at 11:44 PM ^
I can tell by your mastery of the English language that YOU are not the best MGoBoard poster we could get.
October 16th, 2010 at 11:40 PM ^
our offense is "pretty good"?
Sort of like Tom Brady's wife is "kind of attractive".
October 16th, 2010 at 11:29 PM ^
That some of the more veteran guys like Huyge did realize what was going on. Field goal kicking units don't have a ton of athletes on them so you can't fault them for being completely unable to contain the return. The real question is why, after we continue to have field goals blocked, don't we put some more strength (starting o-lineman) on the line? Ferrara got ran the fuck over by Clayborn.
October 17th, 2010 at 7:53 AM ^
needs to get the #1&% ball in the air and it wouldn't get blocked.
October 16th, 2010 at 11:30 PM ^
Denard has a great arm against crappy competition when he is throwing to wide open receivers, however he struggles mightily when he actually has to make any kind of read and decide what to do with the ball. i believe and hope that this will come with time, but lets face it he is NEVER gonna be a great passer. We are better as an offense if he throws the ball 15-18 times a game. And is it just me or does he not do a very good job of scrambling. Most of his big runs come on designed runs or read-options.
October 16th, 2010 at 11:47 PM ^
"Most of his big runs come on designed runs or read-options."
Um, isn't this point?
If the running game continues to develop with a healthy Shaw, Toussaint, Dee Hart... he won't need to be a great passer.
October 16th, 2010 at 11:30 PM ^
"RR has not done well in recruiting on this side of the ball."
You realize that players from his first class ('09 ... not '08, except for some late snake oil) are 2nd-year players (true sophomores or redshirt freshmen), right?
Still too early, although, in retrospect, it's not hard to make fun of his '09 CB recruiting (big CB who'd probably grow into a safety and small CB who appeared to be Denard bait).
October 16th, 2010 at 11:40 PM ^
Out of those two recruiting classes, we have twenty defensive players on the roster. Four are starters already (and RS sophomores Floyd and Demens are starting now as well). One more (Carvin Johnson) has started. Black and the three freshman CB's have all gotten significant playing time as well. And the group of guys I've listed doesn't include blue-chip prospects like Furman, Robinson, Campbell, Ash, Wilkins, etc.
In a year or two, this defense is going to be fantastic.