Was gonna get pissed, then read board posts

Submitted by Tweeter on October 10th, 2009 at 11:41 PM

I was thinking of posting about how upset I am about Robinson being in the game and other random decisions, but then I read posts on this board and realized that these coaches know what they are doing. Give them the benefit of doubt here. I know Forcier is by far the superior passer, but he has also survived by a thread throughout this year. Robinson just led a TD drive, and UM only had to gain another 25-30 yards from where they were to get in field goal range.

I think the decision makes sense. Play the guy that has the offense rolling, get in fg range, then see what happens. Fact is, if Robinson makes a half way smart play and checks to Odoms underneath, UM is in FG range and we are all watching OT.

Sucks that the game ended the way it did, but lets relax and realize that these coaches know a lot more about football than we ever will.



October 10th, 2009 at 11:44 PM ^

I think if anything, I was more pissed that UM didn't run with Minor any more. They had great success, even out of I-form. Just run it down their throats until they prove they can stop you, and then throw in some play action.


October 10th, 2009 at 11:48 PM ^

would have liked to see just power running throughout the second half, but not sure this team is built to continue on that pace. Last year against PSU, we carved them up with pretty simple running plays, PSU adjust at halftime, and UM got blwon out in the second half. So maybe we should have run it until they proved they could stop it, but on the other hand, if not for a few stupid decisions/plays by players (forcier to's, matthews muffed punt, robinson throwing to no one) UM wins this game going away.

This game is on the players for not making plays or for making poor plays. Sucks, but it happens when you have a young team.


October 10th, 2009 at 11:58 PM ^

We really didn't have many opportunities to run Minor after his final TD. Our next possession was at our 2-yard line, and a first-down handoff to Minor lost a yard. In the next possession, we had a delay of game that put us in long yardage right off the bat. And then it was the two Denard possessions.


October 11th, 2009 at 12:03 AM ^

He turned the ball over too many times and made bad plays one too many times. At that point you have to put Denard in, and when he did, we scored. You HAVE to go with Denard on that final drive. He earned it, he was the only one moving the chains, and Tate was just "off"....I love the move by RR, it shows D-Rob that Coach Rod believes in him....which is important.


October 10th, 2009 at 11:48 PM ^

if you can remove the passion from the arguement, it might be important to realize that on the scoring drive DR led he passed 2 times for 16 yards. This drive was going to be totally different, so the drive before almost doesn't matter. Personally, I think that Tate was the better option, but I trust the coach and respect his decision. That is what he gets paid to do, and that is why I like him. He will make a decision, and then he will most certainly stick with it. The season is only half over and Iowa is a good team. I am still more pissed losing to MSU than this game. Delaware St. couldn't come at a better time.


October 10th, 2009 at 11:48 PM ^

we actually would have won...seriously. we were 3-9 last year...and have just went down to the wire with a top 15 team...I know we were spoiled with a 4-0 start..but we will win 7, maybe more this year...we go bowling...


October 11th, 2009 at 12:01 AM ^

Ain't a bad place to spend a few days. Its not SoCal, mind you (or Miami, or New Orleans, or ... Hell, you get the idea). At this point, I'd just be happy going to ANY bowl, (maybe not the Motor City).

I'm really not too broken up about this loss. We played a Top 15 team to the wire on the road despite 5 turnovers. Our defense really looked the best its looked all year, (okay, the two TDs to the TE sucked). Offense still doesn't have the same spark it had in the first couple of weeks, and I really wish I knew why. There were moments, but too damn few.

EDIT: Are the offense's problems really just about missing Molk?


October 10th, 2009 at 11:50 PM ^

That's a pretty tough position to put DRob in.
The turnovers killed us, especially Matthews
dropped kick return.
The team is still growing, they still made
it close.


October 10th, 2009 at 11:54 PM ^

Typed in a hurry. Obviously the game would have ended one way or the other since we were down two. Sorry. Points still stand. Coaches made the call they thought was right, we need to live with that. Like I said, they were on the edge of FG range with D Rob. If he hits Odoms underneath he gets across the 50 with plenty of time left. Only need another twenty yards and we are in FG range.

D Rob made a mistake, but its not like Forcier didnt get away with a ton of mistakes on last minute drives throughout this season.


October 10th, 2009 at 11:56 PM ^

Why was Tate pulled off the field for the final drive??? He was on his way out to win the game or put them in it just like again Notre Dame, Indiana and the tying touchdown againist State.
This is what I don't seem to understand.
Seems childish by RRod.


October 11th, 2009 at 12:03 AM ^

Tate made some plays against those teams, but he was also very lucky to get out of those games with great comebacks. Several plays could have gone the other way. Just like tonight. Iowa had chances to pick of a couple passes Tate jsut threw up.

Listen, I love Tate as much as anyone especially after last year, but people need to relax on the Tate is the savior of the World stuff. Maybe we would have scored with him in, maybe he would have fumbled the first play, who knows. What I do know is that Rrod is smarter than me when it comes to football, and D Rob just led a TD drive. We only needed a FG and were almost there when D Rob made a bad decision.


October 11th, 2009 at 12:03 AM ^

Childish by RR? I love Tate, but he looked frustrated and angry and according to RR in his little interview with Brandstatter he wasn't seeing the field well. Would I rather have the ball in his hands with the game on the line most of the time? Sure, but in this situation his head didn't appear to be in the right place, and Denard just led a long scoring drive. STFU.


October 10th, 2009 at 11:58 PM ^

The season is still young. The future is bright for these Wolverines. Tough loss but we were competitive throughout. Hopefully more wins will follow suit.


October 11th, 2009 at 12:06 AM ^

We were more competitive this week in a far more hostile environment than we were in East Lansing. We'll get there. It's gonna take some more time.

Realistically, then, I can easily contemplate wins against Purdue, Illinois and Delaware St. That gives us 7. If we pull off 1 of 3 versus Wisconsin, Penn State and Ohio State, we'll have had a reasonably good season considering last year's Pepto Bismol fiesta. Plenty of football left to play.


October 11th, 2009 at 12:00 AM ^

It could be worse, people. Last year we would have been happy to just be in a huge game on the road against a ranked team. We're 4-2 and there are positives to take away from every game we have played. The defense played great. we had 5 turnovers and still could have won the game. We ran the ball 1000x better than last game.

I think Tate was hurt, I think he hurt his hand. it was a learning experience for the entire team. We'll be fine. Games like this help us beat OSU at the end of the season.


October 11th, 2009 at 12:04 AM ^

You hit the nail on the head, I like everyone who watched the game realized Tate struggled throughout, I don't question Denard coming in, yes I would have like to seen the change of pace QB earlier in the game, but he lead them to a TD when they were struggling. However, at the end of the game, and needing to travel the field for a field goal, you go with your best passer period. I have been more disappointed with the play calling than anything, Michigan isn't throwing anything out there which is "new" teams can watch the previous weeks film and already know what Michigan is doing? If you want Denard to get respect as a threat put him out there with Tate, get creative, I was hoping to see some Magee "West Virgina vs. Oklahoma" ass whooping play calling instead is the "SOS".....Same old Shit....give your team a chance, Iowa is no way the "12th ranked" team in the Nation. I'm disappointed as everyone, because this was a truly winnable game, and we all watched it....Go Blue, just wish Tate lead us to a shot at a field goal, not the right position for Denard, if Tate was injured, then I'm all for Denard, but it didn't seem that way as he tried to run on the field, and got called back....


October 11th, 2009 at 12:12 AM ^

So are you saying that MSU is that much better than Iowa defensively. Because it seemed to me that UM changed quite a few things up to exploit what Iowa thought they would see out of the run game. UM ran the ball very well in this game. Plus If Iowa was so sold on stopping D rob running, how come he went right down the field running the ball almost exclusively, except for two passes.

Yes this was a winnable game, and Iowa probably is not the 12th best team in the country, but UM is also not ready to be a top 25 team in the country. Could this team be undefeated right now? Yes, they could. Could the 2007 team have won the National Championship, yes they could have. Just cause the talent is there does not mean results will follow right away. Give them time, this coaching staff knows what they are doing.


October 11th, 2009 at 12:11 AM ^

This "childish" meme must die

Where do people come up with this shit? I think there is a lot of sound reasoning behind the decision to put in D-Rob, which has been elucidated ad nauseam...

If you think it was a "childish" decision, my guess is that you only understand how to make childish decisions. Why would you assume that emotion drove the decision-making process? There were plenty of good reasons... whether you agree with them or not... to put D-Rob in there. Maybe it wasn't the best choice... but "childish"?

Grow up!