September 10th, 2010 at 6:48 PM ^

Possibly Tate's attempt to somehow be relevant again?    I say be a good teammate and humbly work your way back up the depth chart.   Tell your family to leave the twittering alone and let what happens on the gridiron do all the talking for you.   

Let your play do the talking son.... let your play do the talking!


September 10th, 2010 at 2:25 PM ^

Seriously? Seriously? .......really? what the hell is going on? I really hope this has something to do with family and not with the game tomorrow. rejgbierugbliahbrgiluhrbg. Maybe it is the past two years that are making me view anything like this in a negative light...but I just do not like where this is going.


September 10th, 2010 at 5:24 PM ^

100% chance Denard gets the start tomorrow. I can't imagine a scenario in which RichRod rewards Denard's performance against UCONN by letting Tate start. I know we're all about the team and working hard in practice etc, but WTF kind of message would that send to Denard?

If his secret is related to playing time, then it's probably something along the lines of a few series in the 2Q or something ...

STW P. Brabbs

September 10th, 2010 at 4:25 PM ^

If this tweet really is related to a significant wrinkle in the game plan, or something to do with Tate transferring, Momma Forcier should be fucking ashamed of herself for the need to draw attention to her and her son leading up to the game.  Jesus. "I've got a secret :)"  What is she, thirteen years old? 

QBForce is getting to the point where I don't even get irritated with Tate when he acts a little immature or arrogant - the website makes it seem like it would be a miracle for someone with his upbringing not to have a narcissistic streak a mile wide. 

STW P. Brabbs

September 10th, 2010 at 3:52 PM ^

Sure, for variety's sake let's make sure the guy who accounted for almost 400 yards of total offense isn't on the field as much as possible. 

Fuck a different look.

I'm really not hating on Forcier here, but if anyone can explain to me why Denard should get fewer snaps after his performance against UConn, I'm all ears.  Unless he's hurt.  Or in the midst of an ether binge. 


September 10th, 2010 at 3:56 PM ^

It's just keeping the look changing. Seriously, after you spend all week preparing for that guy, having Forcier come out and start delivering quite a different set of plays, including some deep balls and so on, would really mess with you. Put Forcier in for a series, and then go back to Denard. The young defensive guys are so shook up they've now forgotten their Denard assignments.

STW P. Brabbs

September 10th, 2010 at 4:11 PM ^

I understand that this is the logic you're using.  But it doesn't make any sense to throw another QB in when your starter looks great in all aspects of the game.  If Denard is throwing short routes with touch and accuracy, making good reads, throwing over the middle when it's open, and doing the dilithium thing ... man, that's far more worrisome to a defense than any hypothetical change of pace.  Forcier would be more a breather for the defense than a headache, if Denard is playing anything like he did against UConn.

If Rich decides to bring Tate in just because it's something different - and not because Denard is struggling in practice this week for whatever reason - it would be a case of him being too goddamn clever for his own good.  If you've got a stud at QB, you keep him in there.  End of.   Ask John Cooper whether it was worth taking Joe Germaine out for Stanley Jackson's change of pace against Michigan.

STW P. Brabbs

September 10th, 2010 at 4:36 PM ^

Maybe just seeing Tate will make the ND defense relive last year's game, and shake their confidence.  But I doubt it.  I really have to think they'd be more worried about the QB who's at least two steps faster than their fastest player.

Seriously, at this point are we really sure that Tate is offering significant skills that Denard doesn't have?  We know that Denard is much faster, a much more effective runner, and therefore much more in command of Rodriguez's offensive bread and butter.  Denard also has a much stronger arm, and was very, very accurate against UConn.   Does everyone just assume that Tate's deep ball is considerably better than Denard's, even though we haven't seen Tate air it out with success since the ND game last year, and even though Denard has the stronger arm?  Of what, exactly, does Tate's change of pace consist?  (Other than the obvious change from 'threat to score every time he takes off' to 'threat to pick up 5-10 yards when protection breaks down.)

One of the greatest parts about Denard's performance against UConn, to me, is that most of what he accomplished on each play was within the framework of that particular playcall.  He ran the offense, and he ran it like a well-oiled machine.  Much of Tate's success, on the other hand, came from improvisation - a hell of a lot of scrambling and moxie.  Certainly, a great QB needs to improvise, but I think Denard's speed allows him to do so just as well as Tate, and with considerably less risk.  And, as we saw last year, Tate was frequently on the razor's edge of gutsy brilliance and crippling irresponsibility with the football.  I'm sure he knows the offense better as a sophomore than he did last year, but I really don't see the advantage in putting him in unless Denard is struggling.  I think it's absolutely bizarre that people still don't consider Denard to have earned the sole starting spot, at least for a week, after the brilliant show he put on against UConn. 


September 10th, 2010 at 4:47 PM ^

Don't get me wrong, Denard should be the starter after last weeks game but as Brian said we still don't know how well Denard reads the defense.  We don't know if he can come off the primary receiver and such.  Keep in mind, we aren't talking about trotting out Sheridan (no disrespect to Nick), we are talking about bringing in a guy who is experienced, a proven passer and can read defenses extremely well.  I'm not saying that Tate should play half the game but a series or 2 just to give ND headaches and torch them through the air like he did last year.

STW P. Brabbs

September 10th, 2010 at 4:53 PM ^

On 'reads defenses very well."  Where's the evidence for this?  Tate scrambled at the slightest provocation last year, and frequently threw dangerous/ill-advised passes.  He certainly did a poor job reading defenses on the read option, as well? 

This is what's getting my dander up here - why is everyone assuming that Tate is so much better as a passer than Denard?  Maybe Denard will revert to what he looked like last year, but all the buzz since spring was that he had made huge strides as a passer, and it looked like the UConn game validated that.   Even if Forcier is slightly better and making reads than Denard, that advantage would be completely negated by the fact that Denard's speed makes his reads much, much easier to make - see: Oh wow he's open. 

I'm glad Tate will be available if Denard struggles at length or, god forbid, gets hurt.  He's not a bad player.  But unless that happens, I think it would be crazy to get him in the game. 


September 10th, 2010 at 5:01 PM ^

Fair enough, I can honestly say that I do not know football enough to see what reads QB's are making while the play is going on but seeing how Tate has been groomed to be a QB since he could walk, I'm assuming he has a good handle on the game plus the fact he isn't the most athletic player on the field (or at his position). 

I will say this, I suppose I am assuming Tate is a better passer than Denard at the moment because I have seen what Tate can do while despite Denard's strong spring, fall, and game against UConn, there are still questions about Denard's passing.  I'm not trying to hate on Denard or you but even Brian had questions about Denard's passing.  Don't get me wrong, Denard's progress is unbelievable from last year to this year and I am a HUGE supporter of Denard and would love to see him torch ND defense with his arms and legs but I wouldn't be surprised to see Tate get some PT this game.

I do agree with you that Denard's speed will open up defenses a lot (read: extremely) and leave receivers wide open FWIW.

STW P. Brabbs

September 10th, 2010 at 5:06 PM ^

I think what I'm saying is that until ND proves that Denard's passing is still a weakness in this offense, there's no reason to put Tate in.  Basically, that means that Tate is the backup, who should be ready if called upon.

But if Rodriguez is planning to put Forcier in no matter what, - if there's some kind of predetermined rotation - I'm seriously questioning that logic.  We'll see what happens tomorrow.

Go Blue. 


September 10th, 2010 at 5:12 PM ^

Alright I get what your saying and I hope that your correct that Denard's passing has improved enough to the point were it wouldn't be reason enough to put Tate in for no reason. (Not trying to disrespect Tate here but hoping Denard is well made of dilithium with Henne arms)

Go Blue! and Beat the Irish!