Some Positives for Denard Yesterday

Submitted by jbibiza on November 6th, 2011 at 7:46 AM

One bright spot that no one else has mentioned - maybe because it was a figment of my imagination - but it seemed to me that Denard was reading his progressions much better than ever.   Also when he threw long to covered receivers the passes were well overthrown rather than punted into potential INTs.    If you add in at least 4 cold drops + the Hemingway TD + plus the 2 PI's + 3 easy completions that the  DE tipped he would have had a monster completion percentage (and the only pick was a tipped ball that also could have been PI).    I know that's a lot of IFs but they are all plausible, so it is not that hard to see the improvement hidden within the stats.  Hopefully it will show up on the field in Champaign and beyond.

Comments

MGoPAR

November 6th, 2011 at 9:40 AM ^

I am of the belief that Denard did not have as many progressions to go through last year. I think the spread passing game Rodriguez and Magee had implemented to that point was built on one to two reads that Denard had to make quickly whereas now Borges has the wide receivers running much more complex routes and which require Denard to wait and maybe make 4 to 5 reads.

I believe Rich made the game simple for him since he was just a first year starter. I also agree that he never scrambled last year either. There is one specific play that comes to mind. Against Illinois, he moved out of the pocket and had about 15-20 yards if he chose to run. Instead, he waited and found JR Hemingway for a play that ended up as a touchdown but I vividly remember screaming "RUN" at the tv.

hennesbe

November 6th, 2011 at 10:43 AM ^

Denard is not a drop back passer and may never be.  Why a play wasn't called in the last set of 4 on the goal line for him to be scrambling is stupid.  After the OC called the first one or maybe 2 for Denard to stand flatfooted and throw into the EZ, Hoke should have taken charge and told Denard to do what ever he needed to score a TD.

chunkums

November 6th, 2011 at 11:23 AM ^

Perhaps this is because those kinds of plays often end in sacks, which would have ended the game.  Of all the things to complain about, I feel the end of the game isn't one of them.  On that series we had the following:

1.  A TD catch that was ruled incomplete for some bizarre reason.

2.  A pass that BOUNCED OFF VINCENT SMITH'S CHEST

3.  A perfectly thrown slant to Roundtree who was being grossly held on an uncalled PI penalty.

To me the right plays were absolutely called.  One two of the plays the refs failed to execute and on one of them Vincent dropped an easy TD.

ChuckWood

November 6th, 2011 at 1:59 PM ^

Don't you think it's time to take off the training wheels and stop looking at "positives" of Denard's game when we lose?  There's nothing positive about it.  A VERY caustly fumble.  An interception in the red zone.  He has 2 years starting experience and a 3rd year of getting PT. He should be a fully functioning QB.  

ChuckWood

November 6th, 2011 at 4:41 PM ^

Yes, you're right about that.  That was a case where the receiver caused the INT.  However, Denard has been known for costly turnovers.  Game changing turnovers. 

My point is that for a QB to have this much experience, you should not be looking at positives in a loss.  Certain things should be expected of him.  The better team did not win yesterday.  Partly because of Denard, partly because everyone brought stone hands, partly because of the refs, and partly because they just didn't get it done.  Things like not taking care of the football (the fumble) are what infuriate me the most.