Props to Tate Forcier

Submitted by BeantownBlue on September 5th, 2010 at 7:44 PM

I just think it's worth taking a moment to show Tate Forcier some love today.  As a competitor, it must be so frustrating for him right now.  With a lesser QB, we might be dealing with a public tantrum.

But as far as I've heard and seen, he has handled his recent demotion with class, putting the team first. 

Though I'd never wish injury upon anyone (especially Denard), we may need Tate.  And lord knows he did some great things for us in the past.  If called upon, it's nice knowing we've got a talented, team-first guy waiting in the wings.  As I recall, Brian Griese was benched at one point.  Things worked out pretty well for him in the end. 

Go blue!  Hang in there Tate!

Comments

blueintampa

September 5th, 2010 at 7:50 PM ^

If things don't work out this year there is a very good chance that there will be a completely new system next year. One that shoelace becomes an NFL caliber, Dexter Mccluster type, rb/slot/wildcat monster.

blueintampa

September 5th, 2010 at 8:02 PM ^

You're right, where's my spirit... There is no way we won't finish the season the way we start. Our coach isn't on the hot seat. We would never have to experience losing a coach and bringing in one with a new system, just to have to watch players that don't fit try and run it....

I Miss Bursley

September 5th, 2010 at 8:05 PM ^

One comment made during a frustrating, emotional moment doesn't really count as a tantrum, no?

I'm with the OP, he could be handling this a lot worse. I just hope he sticks it out, obviously rushing DR 29 times a game won't be the game plan every week. I'm sure RR will be getting Tate more involved soon enough.

I will say this though: If there is any truth to the talk about him having attitude problems then I really hope that being benched corrects it instead of worsening it. Considering all he accomplished last year and all the shortcomings he had, we really need him to do some growing before he can become a legitimate part of the gameplan.

maizenbluedevil

September 5th, 2010 at 8:11 PM ^

To you as to the OP:  What planet have you been on?  

It was a lot more than one comment.  

Just because Tate could have handled it worse doesn't mean he handled it well, and "with class and deserves props." (as the OP said)

Seriously, "could've handled it worse" is our metric of what deserves props now?

Set the bar low much?

I Miss Bursley

September 5th, 2010 at 8:18 PM ^

Haha sorry man didn't mean to ruffle your feathers so much, I guess I'm tempted to give him the benefit of the doubt a bit more than I would with anyone else...I'm partial to remembering some of the great Tate moments from last year while glossing over the negatives.

Still hoping this stuff smoothes itself out, it'll give me even more confidence in RR as a coach/Teacher and in Tate's ability to grow.

maizenbluedevil

September 5th, 2010 at 8:35 PM ^

What are you talking about?  No ruffled feathers here.  

My point - which is simple enough yet seems to somehow be going over your head - is that there's a huge difference between giving someone the benefit of the doubt and giving them props.

I'll give Tate the benefit of the doubt, but under no circumstances is how he's behaved worthy of props...  which is what the OP said and what you've agreed with.  

.ghost.

September 5th, 2010 at 8:45 PM ^

I will break it down for you.

In the event that Denard Robinson suffers injury at some point during the football season, Tate Forcier's experience and fabled "moxie" may, in fact, become very, very crucial to the success of this team.  However, OP certainly does not wish such a scenario to present itself.

mejunglechop

September 5th, 2010 at 8:52 PM ^

That's a fair (if generous) reading of that statement. My question is why he referred to the prospect of Denard getting injured in the same way I'd refer to the possibility of Pryor getting injured for The Game. It's formulated like," I'd never wish anything like x on anyone, but some good would come of it."

kb

September 5th, 2010 at 8:02 PM ^

he could have been supporting the team instead of sitting alone on the bench with a towel wrapped around his head, and he could've not said what he did to reporters.  I'm sure it's frustrating, but he could've decided to handle things differently IMO.

CWoodson

September 5th, 2010 at 8:59 PM ^

He's 19, he got passed for whatever reason by a true freshman who may end up being crazy good but is plainly not ready.  He could have given Denard a big kiss, but realistically, he wasn't going to be thrilled about this.  Denard is and should be the starter, but it's hard to fault Tate for being upset.

mejunglechop

September 5th, 2010 at 8:46 PM ^

Why do people keep saying Tate is a class act? Don't get me wrong, I don't think he's a bad kid, but there was nothing classy about how he handled himself yesterday and there was nothing classy about slacking off over the summer. Again, I don't think he's a bad kid, but he has some growing up to do.

bronxblue

September 5th, 2010 at 9:21 PM ^

But what off last year, playing the whole season despite being injured, winning some games the team should have lost, feeling the brunt of RR's (and some fans') ire whenever anything went wrong.  Robinson was never chastied in the media like Tate was last year despite having a far better year.  This summer, all we heard was how great DR was and how bad Tate was, even though there were others who did not arrive up to standards.  Michael Shaw apparently had grade issues, but RR never said he needed to "grow up" like he did with Tate.  My point is that everyone is revising their views of the kid after a single game and some second-hand stories from the summer.  All I know is that Tate is still with the program, and as such he deserves the same level of respect and fandom as every other Wolverine until some tangible proof is shown that he is no longer on board.

mejunglechop

September 5th, 2010 at 9:43 PM ^

First off, those were first hand accounts of what happened over the summer, in other words, from people who were actually there. But to get at the heart of your comment, the things you describe Tate enduring last year are standard for a starting quarterback playing at a major college program. Fair or not, they get more scrutiny and expectations are higher for them.

briangoblue

September 5th, 2010 at 10:59 PM ^

No kidding, "class act?" Let's not turn our backs on the kid forever for a bad choice or two made in frustration, but there's no need to justify his act yesterday. Even seasoned pros can struggle with body language after a benching (see Bledsoe, Drew- also under: Awkward Super Bowl Moments). That said, I hope somebody got in his ear to make sure that never happens again. Every second the camera was on him it wasn't focused on a proud Michigan team closing in on a big win.

myrtlebeachmai…

September 5th, 2010 at 8:07 PM ^

With the wording of his dad's response, and the fact that Big Will didn't see the field either (I believe), has anyone thought the "official roster for the UConn game" may have been an extension of the discipline thing?

I know both got their wings back eventually, but maybe it came with an extended detriment, like not being able to play the first game...

I wouldn't put it past the coaches to use real games as further motivation.  Perhaps Tate's surprise was that he thought an injury would surely revoke it, but found out RR was serious, and DG was going in at any cost. 

It just seems to me that his dad's comments (something to the effect of we all can't see everything that goes on inside) was an explanation of sorts.  I have no inside info, just connecting dots.

I really don't think DG would be our 2nd QB yet; not for an injured DRob.  Will DG gets snaps, yes, I think the staff believes so (hence why they didn't blink "burning" his redshirt - he's going to play this year - IMO this game did nothing to BURN it).  Could DG get more time if the other two struggle?  Absolutely!   However, I really have to think that for a sudden injury, DG's not the answer yet.  something more was going on, IMO.

 

myrtlebeachmai…

September 5th, 2010 at 10:43 PM ^

It wasn't a guess about the wings...  I truly thought he'd been one that went w/o for a while.  My mistake, for likely equating the wing thing for the calling out he got for showing up the least in shape.  Situation still fits.

As for playing time, it was a guess; was watching for him constantly and didn't see him.  Can I ask how much time he saw?  (aside from special teams)

DatDude80

September 5th, 2010 at 8:13 PM ^

& he has still acted like a spoiled 2 year old, I'd say "props" are the last thing he actually needs.

Time for Tate to grow up & take some responsibility for his actions.

ForestCityBlue

September 5th, 2010 at 8:15 PM ^

A question of clarification.  The ABC crew yesterday made it seem like Tate was sitting on the bench sulking while everyone was celebrating.  The question I have is this: was Tate sitting there of his own volition; or was he told to sit there by the coaching staff.  If it was the staff, then, dang, what an awkward spot to be in when all your team mates are jumping around celebrating.  If he is there on his own, yikes, what a childish, selfish, thing to do to call attention to yourself like that.  Does anyone here know which it is?

ForestCityBlue

September 5th, 2010 at 8:38 PM ^

That is what I thought.  But it seemed like people here were giving him the benefit of the doubt which could only mean they thought he was put there by the coaches.  It looked to me like the ABC crew nailed it and he sitting there all by himself going all emo and making a big show of the fact that he was sitting on the bench.  I get the feeling he will be shown the ABC broadcast by the coaches, hopefully by his team mates and told that this is not how a leader acts.  If the situation was what it appeared to be on the surface, I lose a lot of respect for him.  (At the same time, if I misjudged the situation, I would want to be fair to him.  Being unfairly smeared on national TV is no picnic either).

bronxblue

September 5th, 2010 at 9:10 PM ^

Per some of Mike Forcier's tweets, it sounded like the coaching staff was punishing him this game.  While I agree it is unlikely they ordered him to the bench, you never know.  It is far more likely that we caught a couple of minutes of ill-advised pouting/introspection during an otherwise-positive Forcier day. 

ForestCityBlue

September 5th, 2010 at 9:18 PM ^

Yeah, but when you are trying to get out of the coach's and team mate's dog house, having a two minute lapse where you sit on the bench for "a couple of minute of ill-advised pouting" do not do a lot for helping you earn bach your starting job.  Whether they happened to catch him in the worst two minutes of an otherwise possitive day are irrelevant.  He was caught sulking on the bench on ABC.  They talked about it.  They lingered over it and made it a big deal.  If he was on the bench, he should have looked alert, engaged, ready to play.  Looking at the plays, looking at still shots of the pre and post snap reads and so forth.  Not head down with a towel over your head and another over your knees.

bronxblue

September 5th, 2010 at 9:45 PM ^

I understand where you are coming from, but again, most fans only had a 2-minute window to see him the entire game.  By all accounts, he was ready to come in when Denard went down, and kept cheering on the team even when DG took over.  So maybe at the end of a clear win, Tate sat on the bench, looked around, and took stock of his mistakes and what led to him being on the bench after last year.  Maybe he was saying, under that towel, that he was going to work harder than everyone else from that point on, how he had disappointed everyone and now he was going to take the game seriously.  Maybe still immature, but now a different context.  We have no idea.  But my point is that everyone jumps to conclusions with players based on the most recent evidence (and limited) evidence, and then we all backtrack and reorganize with every new fact.  I just think it is time to focus on next week and ND and stop trying to read so much into what Tate did or did not do, and whether or not he deserves a break.