Tate Forcier: Good at everything, Great at Nothing

Submitted by Bb011 on September 19th, 2010 at 7:45 PM

Obviously we have our starter this season. It isn't even a debate like many thought it would be this year. But it got me to thinking about tate last year. I was watching some of the highlights(and lowlights) of last year and i got to analyzing it and it became easier to see why denard has emerged as our #1.


Tate is mobile, but not "fast". Hes got a decent arm, but not all that accurate on the deep ball. He has decent throw power, but not enough "zip".  Its obvious that denard is much faster. Denard runs like a RB and tate runs like a mobile qb. This becomes obvious when you watch the two run, look at tate who has the ball in one hand while juking and running while denard has it tucked in like a RB. No wonder tate fumbled it! Ball security was not tate's best attribute.


But the part that i truly started to see when comparing the two, was the difference in throwing. Denard has WAY more zip on the ball when he throws it. Throwing a bubble screen is effective this year because drob gets it there much quicker than tate could get it there. There was always a reputation that tate was the better passer, but while rewatching the highlights from last year he made some very bad decisions, and to go along with that didn't have the arm power to hit long passes.  I feel that Denard has surpassed tate in the sense of "throwing" in this scheme. We do a lot of shorter curls, and screens and it needs to be accurate but it also needs to be thrown fast so the defense can't react, and in that sense, Denard is THE MAN.



September 19th, 2010 at 7:51 PM ^

If you don't explain what your saying and leave it to the most ambiguous response on the board then i don't know what to say. I watched every single game last year and was at all the home games, along with a few of the away games. 


September 19th, 2010 at 7:57 PM ^

Tate is very accurate.  I don't think there's much debate about that.  His ability to throw on the run is outstanding.  His bigger issues as a passer are that he's not that big (and may have trouble seeing over the line) and his arm strength is average. 


September 19th, 2010 at 8:05 PM ^

I don't remember the OSU interceptions specifically, but it seemed to me that the vast majority of his interceptions last year were the result of poor decisions, not poor accuracy.  As in, he threw it where he was trying to, just there were three defenders there swarming the receiver.


September 19th, 2010 at 8:45 PM ^

Sam Bradford out of the lineup?

Tate's accuracy was excellent before the injury, and good afterward.  His decision-making could be improved.

He wasn't responsible for generating a Michigan offensive output of 500+ yds/game routinely.  Very few QBs would be.

No need to bash Tate.

Promote RichRod

September 19th, 2010 at 7:50 PM ^

he couldn't stand in the pocket more than 1.5 seconds.  If his first read wasn't there he instantly started scrambling.  Towards the end of the season it seemed like 50% of his passes were outside the pocket, whether designed that way or not.  He improvised OK, but defenses eventually caught on and took away the rollout.  Also, the scrambling led to some turnovers.

Sure, he would probably improve it with experience, but the way DR is able to stand in the pocket and deliver the pass with rushers in his face has been nothing short of amazing.  He looks like a senior at times with his poise.


September 19th, 2010 at 7:55 PM ^

You're missing something about Tate.  I'll call it escapability here, but I thought he had very good spatial awareness when it came to defenders, etc.

Also, I thought his accuracy was decent.

Denard clearly has a bigger arm and loads more quickness.  He's the easy pick for #1.  But, I don't think he has Tate beat everywhere.

Bill in Birmingham

September 19th, 2010 at 8:42 PM ^

I fail to see what value poiting out Tate's perceived flaws are at this point. Yes, Denard is THE MAN. Thank you Captain Obvious. I am personally very grateful that Tate kept last year from being an even greater cluster-fornication than it would have been without him. And I still think he has a big role to play in some future wins.


September 19th, 2010 at 8:02 PM ^

Wow.......I must admit that today has been worse as far as post topics than it was during the off-season.  We could use a HELLO post to get this topic misery over with.  Someone tell RR to get that Kitchen kid on the phone.


September 19th, 2010 at 8:05 PM ^

Denard is THE MAN.

I was a little up in the air when the coaches named him the starter.  And when he set the all-time QB total yardage record in his first start.  Or when he broke it a week later by more than a hundred yards, breaking the Notre Dame Stadium yardage record in the process. 

Fortunately, your conclusion that Tate has "decent throw power, but not enough 'zip'," pushed me over the edge.  I hereby officially back Denard.


September 19th, 2010 at 8:10 PM ^

This whole thread reminds me of an MGoBoard thread from a few years ago where a poster claimed to have been out trick-or-treating with his son on Halloween of '07 when they stopped at Lloyd's house.  The poster tried convincing Lloyd that they needed to play Dreisbach more, after which Lloyd went inside, turned off the lights, and no more kids got any candy.


September 19th, 2010 at 8:11 PM ^



For the last time

1. Tate has a good arm and is accurate-he was hurt the last 8 games idiots-read the UFR's

2. His line blew that's why he had to bail on the pocket.

3. He was a true freshmen, Denard improved from last year is it not probable that Tate with a year of experience, healthy  and an entire offense improved around him to believe Tate would be performing very well if given the chance.


September 19th, 2010 at 8:21 PM ^

Do we really still need posts like this?  Denard is the starter and a revelation, but everyone needs to stop retroactively justifying the change by saying Tate was "good enough."  Listen, Denard beat him and is the better player right now, but in no way should that besmirch the play of Tate last year.  He is a good QB, and I am fairly certain he could start for quite a few teams both in the Big 10 and nationally. 



September 19th, 2010 at 8:20 PM ^

Watching sparty last night, they talked about how Nichols moved over to WR since Cousins was the clear #1. I wonder if Tate could be a Wes Welker-like slot receiver. I'm not comparing him to Welker, but Tate is shifty and probably has lots of practice catching the ball with all those older QB brothers. I wonder if Tate could return punts? Maybe Devin needs to step up as a true #2 before switching Tate around, but I hate to think of Tate transferring, and he's got lots of ability that could help the TEAM. I don't see him being a DB as some have suggested because he's too thin to be a strong tackler. I don't know, I think it would be ironic if everyone suggested Denard be switched to WR and Tate makes the move.

STW P. Brabbs

September 20th, 2010 at 9:25 AM ^

This isn't a fucking joke?  This is either absolutely briliiant sarcasm, or the work of someone younger than 15.

And no one is killing this comment, even though the OP is getting crucified?  You seriously think Tate can play in the slot because he played catch with his brothers?

Look, there are a lot of people on this board who thought Tate should come in against ND as a "change of pace," which is a far dumber sentiment than anything expressed in the OP.  I personally agree that Tate's accuracy is a little overblown - everyone remembers the "Forcier = Accuracy" scouting report coming in, and now it's just supposed to be a given.  Overall, the title of the post is probably pretty accurate - Tate does a lot of things well, but he doesn't have a really elite dimension to his game.  That's hardly ripping the kid, and in fact it tailors pretty closely to his mid-4 star ranking coming in. 


September 19th, 2010 at 8:26 PM ^

Bb011 ..... gutsy post.    And I see where you are going with it.   I think it is easy to be reactionary and bomb this guy for his post but if we can put emotions aside for a moment and see what he is saying, I think he raises some good points in an educated way as opposed to trying to flame and make his points.

1.   Denard does throw the ball with more zip.

2.   That zip does help on those bubble screens as they seem to be working much better this year.  The ball is arriving earlier, consequently, the receivers have more room to make a play. 

3.   Denard throws a very accurate deep ball.

4.   Denard is much more accurate than we ever could have imagined.   His passing percentage is among the highest in the nation right now.  

5.   Tate always had the reputation for being accurate but we never saw it with his deep throws last year.

6.   And with Tate's shorter throws, it does little good to be accurate on those throws if you can't get the ball there quick enough for the receiver to make a play with it. 

7.   Tate was not very fast but was somewhat elusive.    He average 2 yards a carry last year.   Not very productive in an offense where the quarterback is expected to make a major contribution to running attack.   

**All of that said, I think it does little good to compare Denard and Tate.   They are both good quarterbacks but they both obviously have different skill sets.  


September 19th, 2010 at 8:36 PM ^

It's gutsy to side with the guy who is putting up the best numbers in the history of arabic numerals?  That's like trying to sell people on electricity or running water.

I don't think people are necessarily taking issue with his analysis (though some of his points seem a little... um... interesting).  The bigger issue is that by now, the whole "Tate v. Denard" train has pretty much sailed.