QB Conundrum for this Fall

Submitted by Firstbase on

I've been considering our QB situation for this Fall. I'm sure we're all anticipating improved play at this position.

My question for you learned colleagues: With Tate completing the year with a 128.15 QB rating having completed over 61% of his passes (much of this while injured), what do we do with Denard? He could be a dynamic "Percy Harvin" type threat that defenses would have to account for every time he's on the field. It would be a shame to relegate him to backup QB status seeing occasional touches where 80% of the time defenses can stack the line against him since he's likely to run it.

I understand that a quality backup is needed in case of injury, but with Devin Gardner coming in, couldn't D-Rob be better utilized? Do you think D-Rob would mind being on the field more, but not necessarily always at QB?

One final thought... Is there an option package that RichRod has installed in the offense? How would Denard work in that type of scheme?

Your thoughts are appreciated, folks.

.ghost.

January 25th, 2010 at 5:20 PM ^

Denard needs to be the backup unless it is plainly obvious that he is not progressing. I think that Denard needs to be a QB in our system. If he changes to any other position down the road, I still really want to see him take snaps at QB (unless, as previously stated, he is just not progressing). With the premium that is placed on speed in this offense, he could be a VERY dynamic threat under center, as I imagine that Gardner will never be nearly as fast as Denard.

umjgheitma

January 25th, 2010 at 5:23 PM ^

One thing this team does have is quality depth at RB. If Tate is getting the lion's share of snaps at QB I would like to see Denard sprinkled in at RB from time to time. Vincent Smith was effective in the Wisky game running flat routes and I believe Denard could do the same. I don't know if has good hands but I say its worth a shot.

EDIT: Now while thinking of it, if he had issues with the zone read then this could give him experience doing it (albeit on the other end of things). Also could do a half-back toss pass to shake things up

The FannMan

January 25th, 2010 at 5:34 PM ^

I think Denard can both be the back-up QB and play in a Percy Harvin role. Why not? He does the Percy Harvin thing and, if Tate gets hurt, he takes the snaps. The only problem I see is with practice time. (Clue Allen Iverson voice-over for the word "practice.") But I think they could juggle things to let him practice with the 2s and still work on a limited Percy Harvin package with the 1s.

Alot of this depends on how Gardner develops this spring. I think the majority opinion is to have him redshirt this year and preserve 2 years of time after Tate graduates after the '12 season. However, if he is the clear number 2, then we may see Denard as Percy Harvin and Devin burn his redshirt if Tate gets dinged up.

The FannMan

January 25th, 2010 at 6:11 PM ^

You say Denard wasn't competent even when taking half the snaps. So does that mean you want him as an incompentent backup who never sees the field in any other position? If that is true, wouldn't we be better off if he moved full time to something else?

If practice has made/will make him that much better, I don't see how running him in a limited number of plays in a different position would hurt. Please note, the word limited. I am not saying he plays every down in Harvin position.

DoubleMs

January 25th, 2010 at 5:34 PM ^

I'm firmly in the DG-is-redshirting camp.

I think our 3rd-string will be a fight between Sheridan, Kennedy, and Furrha, with Kennedy likely winning out (he did some good during the spring game last year). Sheridan will take his standard place on the sidelines with the mic on and not remove it for the rest of the season.

EGD

January 25th, 2010 at 9:22 PM ^

We can go ahead and list Sheridan as the third-string QB as long as Tate and Denard stay healthy in front of him. But if we actually need our third-string QB to play in a contested game, I have a feeling DG's redshirt is coming off.

sec20

January 25th, 2010 at 5:36 PM ^

Is not switching positions this year at all. He will compete for the starting QB job. If he does not win the job he will be the backup QB, DG will also compete for the job but I think it would be best for everyone DG and Michigan if he redshirts.

seattleblue

January 25th, 2010 at 5:40 PM ^

I wish there was a required donation for all QB speculation of the "Will Tate be starting? Should Denard play another position?" variety. At least then a charity or Brian could be cashing in.

Magnus

January 25th, 2010 at 5:46 PM ^

Denard will be the backup quarterback this season so they can redshirt Gardner.

In 2011, Gardner will be the backup to Tate and Denard will be a jack of all trades.

Tater

January 25th, 2010 at 5:46 PM ^

I think a moratorium might be in order, at least until the spring game. After we see DG play and see how much Denard improves, there will actually be new information instead of the same rehashes and reframes of what we already know.

Then again, if people are really having fun discussing this, who the bleep am I to spoil it for them?

Rasmus

January 26th, 2010 at 10:08 AM ^

This is pretty much the definition of a "frequently-asked question," so maybe Brian et al. should consider changing the name of the current "MGoBoard FAQ" sticky thread to "MGoBoard Help" (and fold the HTML thread into it as well -- in other words, start a new, updated help thread to replace the two current ones) and then start a series of sticky threads where they answer certain frequently-asked questions and people can add comments to them, for example: "FAQ: The QB position in 2010 and beyond"

That way, if somebody has something to say on the topic, they have somewhere to go (commenting in an old, dead thread that nobody is going to see isn't really an option), and they're not constantly starting new threads...

psychomatt

January 25th, 2010 at 6:07 PM ^

Denard will start the season as a close second string QB, but don't be surprised to see him starting within 3-4 games if Tate stumbles early and Denard makes a lot of progress reading defenses and running the zone read in the off season. He is so much faster than Tate and, despite what everyone seems to think, he throws almost as well. RR will have a hard time deciding between Tate and Denard next year.

And, of course RR will have more plays with both Tate and Denard in the game. They were both freshmen last year, so RR had to keep things relatively simple. But he sees exactly what you see -- having both of them in the game at the same time will be very difficult to defend.

P.S. Gardner likely redshirts.

GBLforlife

January 25th, 2010 at 7:37 PM ^

Ultimately everything on our part is just speculation. But, I agree with what you are saying. Denard's tools better fit RichRod's system and what he looks for in his qb. When he becomes a competent enough, I believe he is going to step in. I would love to see this happen from the beggining, but if not then a few weeks into the season.

Franke8

January 25th, 2010 at 7:52 PM ^

It may be true that he fits the system better but until he learns to hold onto the football I don't want to see him start. We have to remember not only did he have an interception problem but a fumble problem as well. For as little as he ran the ball he fumbled an awful lot. If I were Rich I would be having him carry a ball around all year long 24/7 just like in the movie The Program.

jg2112

January 25th, 2010 at 8:52 PM ^

Not only did he have an interception problem and a fumble problem, he also had a "3 months on campus before the first game" problem and a "true freshman" problem. Those latter 2 problems are gone.

bluebrains98

January 25th, 2010 at 6:25 PM ^

Ok, so we all agree:

1) Tate is the starter.
2) Denard is 2nd string.
3) DG redshirts.

There does not seem to be any debate on this topic. Let's talk again on April 18th after the spring game.

KinesiologyNerd

January 25th, 2010 at 8:29 PM ^

We know depth is important, but the point is he had a slight tear of the glenoid labrum. With a good 9-10 months to heal, that shoulder is no more injury prone that his left shoulder. In fact, he'll be less injury prone thanks to his rehab and S&C work.

jg2112

January 25th, 2010 at 8:48 PM ^

uh, that's a question that can be asked about any football player, on any play.

I'm always prepared for the 'worse.'

I don't know what football coach DOESN'T talk about having depth.

Next?

HAIL 2 VICTORS

January 25th, 2010 at 6:29 PM ^

Psycho if Denard is starting in week 4 RR will be looking for a new job in week 14. As for DG all I want to see is him working on his hand signals for play calling in 2010.

jsquigg

January 25th, 2010 at 6:30 PM ^

Shoelace needs to be on the field. What Brian wrote a little while ago was spot on. Start Tate and if he's mildly injured put Robinson in for those series. Give DG a tentative red shirt while grooming him to play if he has to and giving Denard the "Percy Harvin" slotback role. Robinson is too explosive to box him into the single wing and they weren't even running the zone read with him in the game last year.

Blue 57

January 25th, 2010 at 6:33 PM ^

going to play much more this year. You can bet on that. He is the most dangerous weapon we have. And him staying at QB is where he can do the most damage.

maizenbluedevil

January 25th, 2010 at 7:03 PM ^

I realize a big part of the point of this board is speculative discussion, but, honestly, a moratorium should be declared on this topic until after the spring game.

Everything that can possibly be said on this topic has already been said, and we won't learn anything new that will add any insight between now and the spring game.

Zone Left

January 25th, 2010 at 7:30 PM ^

+1 for being right and because Anthony Morelli is a dead fish.

The "what to do with Denard" question is getting beaten to death, although I'm fascinated to see what will happen too. He never ran a zone read, so hasn't even proven an ability to run a standard wildcat package. Will Gardner redshirt? Will Forcier survive another season? Does Terrelle Pryor indeed have emotional problems?

So many questions.