Gardner In Luginbill's Top 5 QBs
Just behind Bolden.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/recruiting/football/columns/story?column…
August 11th, 2009 at 1:10 AM ^
why Bolden is better than DG. Bolden was not impressive on the field. Bascially his rankings are all from camps and how he looked good in shorts. Until he shows it in pads, DG is a better QB even when he's raw as a JR last year.
August 11th, 2009 at 1:16 AM ^
Bolden is not as impressive on the field because OLSM runs a very conservative offense. He is not called upon to throw very often. It's hard to make a judgment either way when he throws a far, far lower number of passes than most other HS quarterbacks.
Bolden has very good mechanics, and outperformed a number of QBs at the Elite 11. Let's at least give him some credit.
For the record, I think Gardner is a far better QB for our system. But Bolden is no slouch.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:31 AM ^
unless you think those coaches are idiots (and they've won several state titles) don't you think they'd let him pass more if they thought he was that good of a passer? he's great in a combine setting but he still threw for less than 1,000 yards last year. people need to see him actually do something in a game.
August 11th, 2009 at 3:42 PM ^
Possibly, but I think it also depends just as much on whom they're throwing the ball to.
The short of it is "don't mess with success." If they've won that many games just running the ball, why change it up?
I've heard the same thing about him being a combine warrior, though. We'll see how it pans out. I believe we got the right guy.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:59 AM ^
I completely agree with you. I was shocked to see Bolden ahead of Gardner.
August 11th, 2009 at 1:45 AM ^
Thae fact is is that Gardner outperformed Bolden at the Elite 11 so I would put him over Bolden.
August 11th, 2009 at 1:53 AM ^
Depends which analyst you talk to.
Rivals/Every is head-over-heels for Gardner and believes he was the best prospect there, but the Scout guys and the counselors at the camp this year both had Bolden ahead of Gardner. FWIW.
August 11th, 2009 at 2:53 AM ^
Honestly, I will assume the exact opposite of anything Chase Daniel says is actually true. The fact that he was a counselor at the Elite 11 means nothing; he was one of the least clutch QBs of all time. See: any important game Mizzou ever played in - the number is minuscule.
I am from Missouri, and many of my friends go to Mizzou; none of them think Chase Daniel was anything more than a douche with a butt chin.
August 11th, 2009 at 6:42 AM ^
wtf does any of this have to do with his ability to assess talent?
August 11th, 2009 at 10:04 AM ^
I could list hundreds of people who weren't clutch QBs whose opinions on quarterback play I would trust more than yours.
Daryl Johnston, John Madden, Rich Rodriguez...
Since when do you have to be a clutch quarterback to understand the position? By your logic, the only people who know anything about quarterbacks are Dan Marino, John Elway, Johnny Unitas, and Frank Reich.
August 11th, 2009 at 11:56 AM ^
+1 for throwing in Frank Reich, even though as a lion he spiked it on 4th down in what I believe was our last playoff game. Having the biggest comebacks in NFL and NCAA trumps that though, I know a 8 year NFL reciever who said he threw the best ball of anyone he ever played with.
August 11th, 2009 at 3:44 PM ^
Nope, can't trust Marino's opinion. Didn't win a Super Bowl.
August 11th, 2009 at 9:01 PM ^
Wow, I never said anything remotely close to what you believe I did. I was merely pointing out that Chase Daniel was a counselor at this camp and that his opinion should be taken with a huge grain of salt.
And, honestly, I've had a lot of exposure to the Missouri program - probably more than most on this board.
I never claimed that I am an expert. In fact, if you read my posts, you'll find that I fully understand that my football knowledge is limited.
What I AM saying, however, is that Chase Daniel is not someone I will listen to when it comes to evaluating QB talent. Perhaps I am jaded by the stories I hear from my Mizzou friends who describe him as a horrible person. You want an example? Glad you asked. It is widely known on the Mizzou campus that Daniel has pictures of girls he's had sex with posing naked while draped in a flag of Texas, his home state. These are in his living room. The student body HATES Chase Daniel because he is a douche who thinks he is bigger than the school and the football program.
I think it's ironic that you, a person that is obviously not in tune with the Mizzou football program, is willing to call me out when I am clearly more informed than you are about Chase Daniel's performance as a QB and as a Mizzou student in general. Hell, I am from Missouri and most of my friends GO TO MIZZOU. By your logic, the national media knows more about Michigan's program than someone who has a ground level exposure to what is ACTUALLY HAPPENING.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:55 PM ^
Chase Daniel is one of many Elite 11 counselors that did not believe Gardner was in the top 5 at the camp this year.
Not sure what his DON'T MESS WITH TEXAS attitude has to do with anything.
I think you were just stretching for an opportunity to let everyone know what a douche you think Chase Daniel is.
August 11th, 2009 at 11:07 PM ^
Dude. Take off Marino and add in JOE MONTANA. Snub of the year. Pink slip for Magnus.
August 11th, 2009 at 3:43 PM ^
Okay.
August 11th, 2009 at 3:20 AM ^
Gardner is a better QB too, it was just one camp.
August 11th, 2009 at 2:50 AM ^
No Boisture. Hmm.
August 11th, 2009 at 3:16 AM ^
I feel like it is important to realize how arbitrary these lists truly are. This isn't a "top 5 for Michigan's system," this is a top 5 of all quarterbacks. With that being said, the mere fact that Gardner is being mentioned despite not being a pure passer is exciting
August 11th, 2009 at 3:36 AM ^
Is it just me or is anyone else sick of hearing about Gardner? He hasn't played his senior year yet and we have a very good QB right now! In fact, we have 2!
Do I think this guy isn't good. No. Absolutely not. I have seen his highlights and he looks great! But we have Tate Forcier right now. I honestly believe he is still underrated and doesn't get enough hype. He could end up being better than Toilet Paper! And if he turns out really good, we may not even need Gardner!
August 11th, 2009 at 4:15 AM ^
sick of hearing about Gardner because he hasn't played his senior year yet. However, you also think we have 2 very good QB's right now, despite the fact that they haven't played in college yet and proven it?
August 11th, 2009 at 7:01 AM ^
Tate Forcier is just straight up not as good as Devin Gardner. He just isn't. Forcier is too polished in the sense that his developmental potential has already been reached. Devin's ceiling is world's above Tate or Denard's. Please don't ever say we might not need a probable 5-star quarterback recruit.
Let me be blunt. We talk about Tate's impressive offer list, but did you notice that Florida, the best school recruiting him... the school with a coach who turned a Tate-like player into a top NFL draft pick at Utah, was not in his top 5? And that fucking New Mexico was? Do you know why? I have a guess... because Tate knew he'd never see the field at Florida. Period. If anything, Tate is overrated.
August 11th, 2009 at 7:49 AM ^
Yet your opinion is so definitive. Forcier has never played a college game or or even a college practice where he was allowed to be hit, and Gardner is a High School junior you've never seen play a game. I want Gardner too and can't wait to see him in action, but let's hold off a bit on projections for guys we haven't seen.
August 11th, 2009 at 3:40 PM ^
Well, the too polished thing was a knock on Forcier throughout his recruitment. It's not something I just made up.
August 11th, 2009 at 3:46 PM ^
So, what you're saying is that Forcier isn't good because he's already good? That makes sense.
August 11th, 2009 at 3:54 PM ^
I think what Brodie is saying is that Forcier's ceiling isn't as high as Gardner's, which is something I think virtually every recruiting service, coach or amateur scout would agree with.
August 11th, 2009 at 3:58 PM ^
I know, but I think the idea that Forcier isn't going to be that good because he's likely already at his ceiling goes hand-in-hand with that sentiment, which I find bothersome.
August 11th, 2009 at 4:02 PM ^
I'm not sure why it bothers you. You can choose to view it as "too good" if you like, but that isn't what I said at all. He's overly polished, he's already been coached for his entire life. There is little upward mobility for Forcier... what you see is pretty much what you get. If he is a middle of the pack QB in the Big Ten, for example, that's all he's going to be. DG has the potential to be an All American with the proper development.
Don't confuse my sentiments for not liking Tate or not thinking he's talented or not hoping he does extremely well. I want what's best for the team, obviously. But I get a little tired of the Tate-worship... he isn't the best thing to happen to this team ever, Denard is actually the more Rodriguez-y quarterback anyway.
August 12th, 2009 at 5:43 AM ^
This is (and it's not just you) one of the dumbest arguments involving recruiting that we have seen develop over the last couple years.
I agree that what this bascially says is "Tate won't get any better because he is already good." WOW! You mean his high school coaches are as good as his now college coaches? That they maximized his potential? How in the world can that statement be made with a straight face?
I mean, I guess it would justify recruiting lower-rated players because of so much potential they maight have (and what is the saying? "Potential gets coaches fired").
Gardner may be a better athlete and may turn out to be better than Tate, but to say Tate's potential is tapped out is just silly to me--and pretty much means Rodriguez signed either a second-rate QB who will be a backup after next season, or flat out wasted a schollie because Tate has nowhere to go but down.
August 11th, 2009 at 4:02 PM ^
Brodie is also saying, Forcier is already near his ceiling, while Gardner is laying on the couch far from his ceiling.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:57 AM ^
It's a tad early to determine whether Forcier is overrated or not, don't you think?
However, we do need Gardner. I'm sick and tired of saying, "well, we've got a super, so let's go get an average player at that position just for depth." Why can't we always target the best of the best? That's how you build GOOD depth, and right now, we're severely lacking in that area.
August 11th, 2009 at 11:01 AM ^
I agree. I'm surprised that Gardner committed to UM knowing that Forcier and D-Rob were already in the fold. I like the kid's confidence.
August 11th, 2009 at 3:42 PM ^
Reading this board you'd think Forcier, a mid range 4-star who sported a couple of impressive offers and a lot of meh, is the best quarterback recruit of all time. Either that or Denard, an even lower ranked 4-star who very few schools wanted as a quarterback, is. This is simply fantasy.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:59 AM ^
I agree 100% with Brodie on this. Devin Gardner is a special talent, imho.
August 11th, 2009 at 5:22 PM ^
how exactly do you know what Tate's ceiling is? Are you one of the coaches?
And just because Tate was a 4 star not a 5 star like Gardner, he won't be as good? Why don't you tell that to Pat White, Colt McCoy, and Sam Bradford who were all 3 stars?
We have everything you could want in a QB in Tate.
August 11th, 2009 at 5:40 PM ^
You start out criticizing me for not possibly being able to know his ceiling (conventional wisdom is that over-coaching is bad, Tate has been trained to be a college quarterback for his entire life... there is nothing raw or moldable about him) and then end by claiming he's everything we could want. HE HAS NEVER PLAYED A COLLEGE FOOTBALL GAME. Jesus, when he comes out there and throws multiple interceptions in a game (and he will, because he is a true freshman not because he's bad or something) you're going to the first person calling for Denard.
August 11th, 2009 at 5:08 AM ^
Let's not be ridiculous. The situations aren't even remotely similar.
Edit: Accidentally just posted instead of replying to the above comment.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:02 AM ^
I think that D-Rob might out class both of them. Dont get me wrong i think that having 3 quality QB's is a plus, but i personally like what D-Rob brings to the table.
Michigan is back!!!!! Believe that!!
August 11th, 2009 at 10:12 AM ^
is going to out class them both but I get tired of the way no one even mentions him as a viable option. This is just speaking personally but I hope he gets a lot of playing time this year. I have been more excited to see what he can do at QB than I was to see TF.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:36 AM ^
realistic and understand he's got a lot of catching up to do if he's going to win the starting job. The odds are just stacked against him given the reps that Forcier and Sheridan have in the system already. I gather most people expect Robinson to play at some point, though, even if it's only within the scope of a limited package and only for a series or two a game.
August 11th, 2009 at 11:04 AM ^
I'd love to see 3 talented QBs in the mix. Having zero talented QBs like we had last season (or QBs that didn't fit the system) is something that I never want to see again.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:36 AM ^
I've gotta say that from Day One back yonder when everyone was salivating over "Beaver to Penis" or whatever or "Newsome is God"--I wanted Tate. I watched his Zapruder Films over and over again, and I marveled at his field generalship, his leadership, ability to make plays, accuracy, arm strecgth, speed, and his chin dimple. He has nice high cheekbones as well. Ahem.
Anyway, I think Tate brings the goodz. I don't know about his competition in or around San Diego--I'm not sure about the La Jolla Asparagus or the Capitola Beach Bon Bons--but Tate (and I saw this in spring game film) has a feel for the game that can't be taught. He hits players on the money, has a good, quick release, great footwork, and by all accounts is one of those "gym rat" types.
And I bristle at the "ceiling" comments. Whose to say what his "celing" is? Does the fact that he's more polished at this stage mean he has limited gorwth and potential? HELL NO I say. I think he's gonna be a good QB and will not relinquish his hold on the position.
August 11th, 2009 at 4:06 PM ^
And then along came Jones
Tall thin Jones
Slow-walkin' Jones
Slow-talkin' Jones
Along came long, lean, lanky Jones