Thoughts on Denard Robinson
D. Rob is going to be fine at QB. I keep seeing people saying that he really showed yesterday that he can't be a passing QB and will only be a runner. As Michigan fans, we have to remember that this kid has only been in the system for a matter of weeks. Yesterday was his third game and he's seen very limited action. He does have wheels like I've never seen before - but I think he's going to be an effective passer at some point in his career.
September 20th, 2009 at 2:04 PM ^
I'm so glad that I am first so I can share my insightful opinion.
He is fast.
Also his problem isn't his throwing ability but his reads, which will improve with time.
September 20th, 2009 at 8:38 PM ^
Please tell me you're not one of those Lions fans who pollutes mlive with ten to twenty "first" posts per article.
September 20th, 2009 at 2:06 PM ^
he will most likely be a quarterback we use once in a while to keep things fresh. tate is just so much far ahead that it is hard not to give him a lot of snaps. i think he will eventually turn into a good quarterback, but never a great one. he is one of my favorite players because he is so electric on the field and he can also be used in the slot.
September 20th, 2009 at 2:12 PM ^
I tend to disagree with the opinion that Denard will not become a great QB. With his natural ability to run for touchdowns, all he needs to do is become an average passer for him to be great in my eyes.
I thought Pat White was a great QB and he was a below average passing threat. IME
September 20th, 2009 at 10:56 PM ^
Look, Tate looked great through two games, but he also showed his greenness this week. Shoelace, OTOH, has been outstanding with his feet, though his reads/throws have been froshy as hell. But, Denard proved he can beat defenses with his feet as part of a very run-oriented offense (not to say the Michigan run-game is one-dimensional).
Tate isn't as far ahead as you might think: we're talking about 3 months of camp over the course of the season, and then the off-season. By my research, Shoelace is comparing very well to Pat White in terms of performance right now, and I think if you're going to look to Rod's past success, Shoelace is the natural QB comparison to make. With his running talent, he may never need to develop a strong long ball or pocket presence to be successful. Which isn't to take away from the fact the kid's got an awfully strong arm.
As Tate matures, his upside is all about consistency re: his accuracy, scrambling ability, and touch. Who's to say Denard doesn't get the nod for QB 1A and Tate is QB 1B? I am pleased with how our young QBs are getting coached up; I look forward to see them mature with every rep.
After three games, and having no idea how Devin looks in Blue (whether he redshirts, whether he is good enough to start right away, whether he even commits...), my opinion is Shoelace stays at QB. Assuming DG pans out and redshirts, Michigan still needs an experienced and competitive 3-deep.
I think the wildcat and some innovative variations are coming, but not a wholesale change of position.
September 20th, 2009 at 11:36 PM ^
Tate is way ahead.
Also, ARGH! Dude, "the wildcat" is already here. If suddenly Rodriguez announced he was going to run "the wildcat," would it look any different than the offense does when Denard Robinson has been in the game? Probably not.
September 20th, 2009 at 2:07 PM ^
If you think he can't be a passing QB, you obviously missed the pass he threw to Odoms (that somehow Odoms couldn't come down in bounds with).
Tate is a much better passer - but Denard's mechanics aren't bad and he throws a good ball. What he needs to work on is his reads / checking down. Something that will improve as the year goes on.
September 20th, 2009 at 2:09 PM ^
With his amazing play making ability that means he just needs to be a credible passing threat.
It is the exception, not the rule that a freshman is ready.
I'm glad Tate is an exception to that rule, but I feel strongly that in two years Denard will be an effective QB.
If he becomes very accurate. WOW
It seems that Michigan may keep up a tradition of top flight QB's. As the game is changing on the pro and college level we are in front of the change not chasing it.
September 20th, 2009 at 2:21 PM ^
Denard needs time to learn coverages, our playbook and get some experience on where (and where not) to throw the ball.
He's aleady made a name for himself. In Wikipedia if you look up Dilithium, under "See also" it lists:
- Dilithium molecular orbital diagram
- Denard Robinson
Nice job Michigan fans!
September 20th, 2009 at 2:21 PM ^
Denard has shown that he throws a crisp ball, the spiral is decent on his passes. He definitely looked good throwing the ball on the run to Odoms. He simply underestimated the speed of our receivers on the INT intended for Odoms. You have to give college receivers more lead than you do in high school, they're simply much faster and athletic. It's the first time he really had an opportunity to throw the ball downfield. Can't compare him to Tate, he's only been running the offense in practice for about a month, and Tate is just naturally a better passer.
September 20th, 2009 at 2:23 PM ^
he just needs experience, which he will get with time
September 20th, 2009 at 2:30 PM ^
His reading is definitely the only problem right now. I think that it mostly comes from how quick he makes his decision on whether he will throw or pass. Once he starts keeping the option of running open after he's made his passing reads he will be dangerous (more than he already is). Hes a high risk/reward player that creates a buzz in the Big House as soon as he steps on the field. Keep giving him some drives and it will pay off especially when we saw Tate get the wind knocked out of him (Im pretty sure I felt what Tate was feeling on that same play ex. unable to breath).
September 20th, 2009 at 2:32 PM ^
if Tay went after that ball instead of letting it come to him.
September 20th, 2009 at 2:33 PM ^
I keep seeing people saying that he really showed yesterday that he can't be a passing QB and will only be a runner.
Who here has said that?
September 20th, 2009 at 2:38 PM ^
I can't find the specific post, but someone's postgame notes included a bullet point that said Robinson wasn't meant to play QB.
EDIT: Link: http://mgoblog.com/diaries/five-things-take-scoreboard
September 20th, 2009 at 2:46 PM ^
mostly shouted around lesser message boards that I feel dirty and ashamed by even visiting.
September 20th, 2009 at 3:26 PM ^
For what that's worth.
September 20th, 2009 at 2:37 PM ^
Because of his speed Denard has a higher ceiling then Tate.
September 20th, 2009 at 2:39 PM ^
I dont know if they are doing this...but if I were coaching Denard in practice I would tell him... "throw the ball on all passing plays and never run" and Id specifically have him in there on passing plays only...
For now....I would do that in practice to get him a chance to learn the rhythm of the passing game
September 20th, 2009 at 3:05 PM ^
D-Rob will play at the quarterback position this year and next. Next years class has another QB prodigy in it as well.. Devin Gardner. I think Devin will be red-shirted for his freshman year. Then D-Robs junior year i think he will make the jump to wide out. I do believe he could give us the biggest bang for our buck here. Rich Rod always wants 2-3 guys to play at any given position at any time.
September 20th, 2009 at 8:47 PM ^
The best HS QB I ever saw was a guy you might have heard of from Pahokee named Anquain Boldin. He stayed on the QB depth chart for a couple of years and then moved to WR because he knew the routes better than the rest of the WR's did, and was faster. Basically, FSU was stocked at QB and thin at WR, so Boldin took one for the team.
I think it turned out pretty well for him.
September 20th, 2009 at 3:06 PM ^
It would have been great if Denard could have redshirted. He's not ready to play QB in Division I. He's not even close.
Saying he made a nice pass to Odoms is like saying Sheridan is good because of his 2008 game against Minnesota. Even with that completion to Odoms, Robinson would have been, what, 1/5 for 2 interceptions.
September 20th, 2009 at 3:17 PM ^
You can't assume that the rest of the game would have unfolded the same way had that pass been completed. For one thing, we wouldn't have faced 3rd and long on the next play, an obvious passing situation. Denard might have gotten more of a chance to get into a rhythm, too. As it was, all of his possessions were very short (because we either scored or turned it over quickly).
September 20th, 2009 at 3:26 PM ^
I also don't live in a fantasy world where that pass to Odoms was completed and maybe Robinson could have completed shorter passes blah blah blah.
Denard Robinson is a quarterback. You can't say "Well, he's a good quarterback, except he sucks when it's 3rd-and-long." Then he's not a good quarterback.
He was asked to complete 5 passes. He completed zero . . . except 2 to the other team. When Nick Sheridan had numbers like that, people were saying "Get him off the field." But Denard can run really fast so people are making excuses for him.
On the season:
2/9, 18 yards, 2 INTs
September 20th, 2009 at 3:27 PM ^
And three touchdown runs....
September 20th, 2009 at 3:30 PM ^
Yes, but that has nothing to do with his quarterbacking skills. If it did, then people should have been saying that Darren McFadden and Ronnie Brown are good quarterbacks.
September 20th, 2009 at 3:51 PM ^
Uhh.. Yes it does. Being able to run the ball from the pocket is a skill some QBs have. It's part of the reason why some QBs are called "dual threats". Don't know if you've ever heard of that before.
Full disclosure: I didn't neg you on this post.
September 20th, 2009 at 4:06 PM ^
You could put Mel Gray or Desmond Howard or Steve Smith back there at quarterback and each one would make some great plays. That doesn't mean they should be getting a great deal of snaps at quarterback.
The one decent team we've played this year (Notre Dame) did a pretty good job of limiting Denard.
September 20th, 2009 at 6:31 PM ^
Tommy Frazier played quarterback pretty well...
September 20th, 2009 at 3:35 PM ^
Denard is 2/8, not 2/9.
September 20th, 2009 at 3:58 PM ^
You have a bad habit of taking what would be a reasonable position (e.g., that Robinson might not be a good passer), overstating it (citing four pass attempts, one of which was changed from a completion to an incompletion by the officials, as clear-cut evidence), and then being a jerk to people who question your overstatement. You wrote this:
Even with that completion to Odoms, Robinson would have been, what, 1/5 for 2 interceptions.
Let me explain this to you again. If the pass to Odoms is ruled a completion, that first interception doesn't happen. That play - a 3rd and long from our own 30 or whatever - would have never taken place. We would have had a first down around midfield and Denard wouldn't have had to air it out on an obvious passing down. He would have gotten at least three more plays in that drive, offering him a chance to lead a longer possession and get in synch with his WRs.
Hey, I agree that he isn't that polished a passer right now. But it is silly of you to pretend that it doesn't matter that Robinson's possessions were all very short and that his four pass attempts were scattered over the course of the game. It's tough for a QB to sit on the bench for long stretches and then come in and be in a rhythm. If you don't buy that, I offer you Tate's second-half numbers (1-6 for seven yards) as additional evidence.
September 20th, 2009 at 4:01 PM ^
I'm not being a jerk. I'm pointing out the flaws in your argument.
I am not using 4 pass attempts as evidence. I am using all 8 of Robinson's attempts this year. Even one of his completions (to Grady against WMU) was thrown high and too hard. He is not a good passer. Whether you watch him or you look at his numbers, you can't reasonably argue otherwise.
"If the pass to Odoms is ruled a completion, that first interception doesn't happen."
You could say this for every play ever. If Brown didn't get that run from the 10-yard line, he wouldn't have scored a 90 yard TD. If EMU had run the ball, Roh wouldn't have picked off that pass. Etc. It's silly.
Robinson is reponsible for throwing that pass, no matter how you explain it away. It fluttered at the end, he threw it short, and it was into double coverage. I'm not interested in "what could have happened." What DID happen was that Robinson made a bad throw and a bad read.
What do Tate's stats have to do with Robinson? Tate started the game. He didn't have a good day. Before yesterday Tate was completing something like 67% of his passes, I think, for 5 TDs and 1 INT. Sure, he had a bad stretch. So what?
September 21st, 2009 at 1:34 AM ^
You have a bad habit of taking what would be a reasonable position (e.g., that Robinson might not be a good passer), overstating it (citing four pass attempts, one of which was changed from a completion to an incompletion by the officials, as clear-cut evidence), and then being a jerk to people who question your overstatement.
Do you expect any more from Magnus? I don't.
September 21st, 2009 at 10:19 AM ^
He's our backup, man, and he has our team's second best passing #'s despite being over a year behind Sheridan.
No one is saying he should be starting, and no is is arguing that he has been a productive passer, but you can't deny he has been productive at QB while in the game. The purpose of a QB is not to rack up passing yards or stats, but rather to move the offense. Denard doesn't have to throw (yet) because he averages 8.6 YPC. To give a little short math; this means on Denard's 26 plays so far this season he has gained 173 yards, an average of 6.6 per play with of course 3 TD's and 2 INT's.
To asses Denards play as a QB without incorporating his running ability you are being unfair. Not one person has said Robinson has been an effective passer, but there are many QB's in CFB who are run first, such as Josh Nesbit, who's passing stats are far from impressive, and they are starters on winning/bowl quality teams.
Rodriguez won't put him in a position to throw before he is ready unless he absolutely has to or is seeing what the kid can do.
September 20th, 2009 at 5:06 PM ^
I can't imagine ever red-shirting him. I think we are going to need his TD's to win a few games. He already has proven, he can break away for a TD almost at will.
I hope you to mean, wow if we only had the ability to red-shirt him (i.e., Sheridan wasn't the back up).
As it stands, if (heaven for bid) Tate went down, I would be ok with Denard being the starter over Sheridan. The passing touch will come. His ability on the ground can't be taught.
September 20th, 2009 at 5:34 PM ^
have defenses stack 8 in the box and us lose because youd rather see Denard over Sheridan? If Tate goes down, I fully expect Sheridan to take 90% of those reps and maybe get a few more plays with Denard. Denard is not ready to lead a team as a full time starter yet.
September 20th, 2009 at 6:50 PM ^
I meant it as, "Wow, he's not a good quarterback. I wish he could have spent a year learning the offense before seeing the field."
September 20th, 2009 at 9:48 PM ^
.....is this a pink slip?
September 20th, 2009 at 10:00 PM ^
Pretty much.
September 20th, 2009 at 3:24 PM ^
He'll almost certainly improve over time.
September 20th, 2009 at 5:01 PM ^
think that D-Rob's running ability is overrated simply because D-Rob has worse running stats in hs than Tate Foricer. It is obvious that D-Rob is a much, much better runner than Tate. Tate is not a bad runner but D-Rob is in an another level.
D-Rob showed solid mechanics and has the potential to be a solid passer down the road. The INTs are a result of inexperience and bad reads.
September 20th, 2009 at 5:02 PM ^
I just can't see wasting that kind of raw talent on the bench (only coming in to fill in for Forcier). Let's be honest, unless Forcier goes down, D-Rob doesn't look like he has a chance to take the starting position away. However, as a slot receiver or a half-back (that could receive direct snaps). He should continue to practice as the 2nd string QB, but I want him on the field with Forcier. Can you imagine an option where Forcier pitches to Robinson who can still run or throw. that would be a two headed montster that would be very difficult to stop. Or, hand off to Minor and it goes the other way.
September 20th, 2009 at 7:09 PM ^
but I have a distinct feeling that D. Robinson is well ahead of where Pat White was after his first 2 months of college practice.
Patience, young padawans.
September 20th, 2009 at 5:34 PM ^
I think he looked like a true freshman that doesn’t get very many reps (which…oh my gosh he is). He has nice arm, he’s just not ready to be the primary guy. I think given more reps and another year under his belt he’ll be one of the better qbs in the b10.
September 20th, 2009 at 8:58 PM ^
Freshman quarterback Denard Robinson on his role: "I'm a quarterback, I'm not just like a running back or something. That's the position I play."
September 20th, 2009 at 9:54 PM ^
In three career games, Robinson has three long touchdown runs that nobody had any real chance at tackling him. Against Notre Dame he was tripped up after about a dozen yards or he would have had a fourth, but that run still helped set up our FG before the half.
I say we keep featuring and playing him as we do now until somebody in the Big 10 can stop him. Frankly, I dont think most of those teams have the speed to handle him. I expect his TD rate to stay about the same as long as he keeps getting the same amount of looks out there.
As it stands now, right now, Robinson is an X-factor no other Big 10 has. That will come in handy since it looks like we might be in a few shootouts this year.
September 20th, 2009 at 10:04 PM ^
I disagree on the premise that nobody had a real chance to tackle him. They did have chances. They just weren't able to do it.
That being said, one of my biggest concerns is what Robinson's insertion does to the offense. Basically, if he doesn't make a big play, the offense bogs down. Notre Dame did a pretty good job of shutting him down. If I'm a defensive coordinator, I'm putting everyone in the box and I'm going to try to make Robinson beat me with his arm. EMU and WMU didn't necessarily have the athletes to make that work, but other teams might.
September 20th, 2009 at 11:09 PM ^
I have been to all the games and I'm telling ou, his three touchdowns were awe inspiring in how easy they were. I know, you can point to this and to that, but those plays were in the bank once Robinson decided which way to go.
I also dont think the offense bogged down with him in it against ND. Frankly, he didnt play enough to qualify, IMO, for that kind of critique. In the limited time he was in there, he contributed to the victory.
So, you want to stack the box. What if Rodriguez comes out with a four wide formation with Hemingway, Stonum, Odoms and Koger. If he cant the ball to somebody in space with a playcall, he will try to do it with formation. At least, so says my inner CoachBT. I just dont think a majority of our Big 10 foes can match up with his speed, especially if they're spread out. THe UM wideouts look to be night and day blocking this season. I'm just not worried about his seemingly one-dimensional game against most of the Big 10. I think we're going to see several more big plays out of him this season.
September 20th, 2009 at 11:31 PM ^
If Rodriguez goes four-wide, I put my defense in man coverage and put the other 7 guys in the box. I might get beat, sure, but Robinson hasn't shown that he can throw the ball well enough to beat man coverage.
I disagree that those TD runs for Denard were "in the bank" once he decided which way to go. The one against WMU involved him dancing and getting a couple good blocks. The fact that it was a MAC team (i.e. inferior talent) contributed to that run a good deal. The one decent defense we've played held Robinson to 4 carries for 21 yards.
September 20th, 2009 at 11:37 PM ^
Magnus please just give it up already, you have been wrong about Denard from the get go. Well at least since you indicated earlier in the year that Denard wasn't a very good runner in HS. and then posted inaccurate stats to back up your buffoonery.