MGoBlog Civil War

Submitted by Six Zero on October 11th, 2009 at 4:40 PM

From where I stand in the east, I can clearly see that there is a storm brewing on the horizon of MGoBlog. The quarterback situation has been a non-issue in September, because, like all issues, nothing really matters when you're winning. BUT all too dangerously, last night could very well become the start of something that threatens the solidarity and unity of the mighty MGoBlog community.

I fear that in the weeks and perhaps years to come, each of us will be forced to take up arms and make a choice for what, or in this case whom, you believe in:

TATE or DENARD.
HOLLYWOOD or SHOELACE.
5 or 16.
Forcier or Robinson.

So ask yourself... are you a Fiver, or are you a Sixteener??

Let the bloodshed commence.

Comments

kmd

October 11th, 2009 at 5:09 PM ^

Because the main dispute people are having is whether you should still play the person that's supposedly playing best at the moment if they aren't necessarily the best for that situation. Many people (self included) think that in a situation that calls for passing and managing the game clock, Tate on a bad day is still a better option than Denard.

DisneyWorldGoBlue

October 11th, 2009 at 5:55 PM ^

I don't understand why this is so hard for people to accept. Denard put them back in the game and was playing well, Tate was obviously struggling the whole game so it made sense to put in D-Rob for that final drive. Everyone seems to think that somehow Tate would of suddenly been on a fire and gone 5-5 on the drive and lead us to a win. RR made the decision and Denard made a bad read, it's not the end of the world they're making progress and I'm excited for what's next.

ZooWolverine

October 11th, 2009 at 7:02 PM ^

I see your point but Denard put them back in the game by running and it wasn't reasonable to do that with 1:30 left in the game. I actually think that with how Tate was playing earlier (in particular the poor decisions he was making), Denard should have gone in a drive or two before he did--but with very little time left, you've got to go with the guy who can pass. Tate also has a little history of going from meh mid-game to amazing at the end of the game, so he might even get the nod for that reason.

I think Denard has great potential and when that passing threat has developed (which I believe it can), he will be a monster of a quarterback, but Tate is the only QB who currently threatens teams both in the air and on the ground and he should be playing the majority of the time for that reason.

formerlyanonymous

October 11th, 2009 at 7:21 PM ^

it wasn't reasonable to do that with 1:30 left in the game.

If Denard would have made the right read on that play, or even ran with the ball, we would have picked up a first down and gotten out of bounds pretty easily. He would need ~20 yards in 40 seconds. That's definitely reasonable.

That said, I agree that DRob should have been in earlier. The spark came too late. Actually, I agree, or can see what you're saying, with much else that you said. I just think the "not enough time" meme is incorrect.

wolverine1987

October 11th, 2009 at 7:47 PM ^

could easily be applied in a different way to Tate if he had the chance to go in IMO. The time issue is relevant, because in that situation passes were called for--they were not (necessarily) in Denard's first drive. And when passes are called for, play your best passer. Look, I get the other side, and its legit POV, but when you're in a game winning drive situation, the odds are with you when you play the only QB you have that has proved he can win the game in the air.

formerlyanonymous

October 11th, 2009 at 8:13 PM ^

I see yours (and others POV) as well. I just think there are a couple using the time crux as a reason he shouldn't have been playing in the first place. I think that's not the right argument.

I agree that the "if he makes the read" was proven that he didn't, but I don't think that means Tate automatically goes either. I think everyone on the "Tate should have been in" wagon agrees with that as well.

I'm neutral on the decision. I don't think it was "OMG WORST COACHING DECISION EVER," but I understand it and respect it. I think it helps that I expected Forcier to be worse than what DRob was on that drive. Lowered expectations and all that.

wolverine1987

October 11th, 2009 at 9:14 PM ^

I don't pretend to know what would have happened, I think it was wrong and yelled it at the TV as Denard was running onto the field that it was wrong and that Denard would throw an INT (not glossing myself, just a fact) but I don't discount that there was a possibility of success either. My beef is with those on both sides that say it was either "stupid and childish" or, as M friend of mine texted me, "the only decision possible"

cpt20

October 11th, 2009 at 5:36 PM ^

1- Forcier has 9 more TD passes.
2- It was Forcier

Question 1: Who played like crap and looked rattle for the first time this season?

Question 2: Who just led us on a touchdown drive, on the road, against a top 12 team, in a hostile environment to get the team in a position to win?

Bobby Boucher

October 11th, 2009 at 6:00 PM ^

1-Forcier(the freshmen who was bound to look like one eventually)
2-Forcier and Robinson! Actually I take that back. Forcier was under center leading them on 2 touchdown drives, Robinson on one.

Question 1: Do you actually believe Robinson was going to throw his way 83 yards in just over a minute with his past incompletion/interception record? Well if you did, you don't now.

Question 2: Was last nights game the first Michigan game you've seen all season?

jmblue

October 11th, 2009 at 6:10 PM ^

We didn't need 83 yards. People keep forgetting this. We only needed a field goal to win the game. Not only did we have less distance to cover, it's also easier to drive over the middle of the field (when your receivers have lots of room to run) than it is to punch it in on the goal line. If Denard had just thrown it to Odoms, we would have been very close to FG range already.

Stephen Y

October 11th, 2009 at 6:45 PM ^

Dude why are you being a dick about it? Forcier was making mistakes. The ball almost got picked off twice in the series before he was benched, and this was because of his poor decision making. His head was not there. There is a reason why Rich Rod is a head football coach making millions of dollars and you aren't.

I Wrote a 4 Wo…

October 11th, 2009 at 5:26 PM ^

Denard will not be the starting QB bar injury to Forcier.

He might split some time, especially when he picks up the offense and learns how to throw to U-M, but until then will not and should not. I love D-Rob but he's just not it. I'm dying to see him THROW for a TD (next week!?!?!?!) this year.