View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently November 28th, 2014, 5:48 am



Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 To Tackle or Not to Tackle 
Author Message
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 13th, 2007, 12:43 pm
Posts: 2753
Post Re: To Tackle or Not to Tackle
Quote:
Again, I can't stress enough that Gardner should be our Qb. I don't get it, at all... And now it looks like we're going to have a freshman/sophmore Qb next year that is a more "traditional" Qb. I don't care if we run the spread or not, but why NOT have a running Qb? 1) we can't seem to defend them, so they have to be doing something right, and 2) the NCAA is not like the NFL. The defenders aren't the same size and the game is much, much slower. In this day and age in the NCAA it seems almost irresponsible to not have a Qb that can pick up a first down with his legs. Even players like Andrew Luck get first downs with their feet. I'd take a guy that can throw over a guy that can run at Qb, but we seemingly have both and just refuse to use him, or rather, we're using him out of position at WR instead...

I don't get it...

And... For the record, if I was Devon Garder and I just watched what Cam Newton and RGIII have done in the NFL and where they were picked in the draft, I'd transfer next year to a college that needs a starting, mobile Qb.


I wanted to stick with the spread-option. Rich Rod built a decent offense here in a relatively short period of time. The problem was the defense. And yet, so many Michigan fans equated the spread-option with Rich Rod's failure, when in actuality it was his inability/unwillingness to recruit decent defenders combined an incredibly inept defensive coordinator. Apparently it isn't "Michigan football" if it isn't a 6'5 white guy handing the ball off behind a line of 330 lb linemen. But whatever.

As to Gardner, I really believe that if he had decent QB ability, they wouldn't have switched his position, or he would've transferred. From what I've heard he can't read defenses that have any level of complexity. If that's the case, he clearly can't play QB, no matter how good he is at throwing the ball and running the bootleg.


September 11th, 2012, 7:31 pm
Profile
Post Re: To Tackle or Not to Tackle
Blueskies wrote:
Quote:
Again, I can't stress enough that Gardner should be our Qb. I don't get it, at all... And now it looks like we're going to have a freshman/sophmore Qb next year that is a more "traditional" Qb. I don't care if we run the spread or not, but why NOT have a running Qb? 1) we can't seem to defend them, so they have to be doing something right, and 2) the NCAA is not like the NFL. The defenders aren't the same size and the game is much, much slower. In this day and age in the NCAA it seems almost irresponsible to not have a Qb that can pick up a first down with his legs. Even players like Andrew Luck get first downs with their feet. I'd take a guy that can throw over a guy that can run at Qb, but we seemingly have both and just refuse to use him, or rather, we're using him out of position at WR instead...

I don't get it...

And... For the record, if I was Devon Garder and I just watched what Cam Newton and RGIII have done in the NFL and where they were picked in the draft, I'd transfer next year to a college that needs a starting, mobile Qb.


I wanted to stick with the spread-option. Rich Rod built a decent offense here in a relatively short period of time. The problem was the defense. And yet, so many Michigan fans equated the spread-option with Rich Rod's failure, when in actuality it was his inability/unwillingness to recruit decent defenders combined an incredibly inept defensive coordinator. Apparently it isn't "Michigan football" if it isn't a 6'5 white guy handing the ball off behind a line of 330 lb linemen. But whatever.

As to Gardner, I really believe that if he had decent QB ability, they wouldn't have switched his position, or he would've transferred. From what I've heard he can't read defenses that have any level of complexity. If that's the case, he clearly can't play QB, no matter how good he is at throwing the ball and running the bootleg.


Week after week Denard keeps proving me right. He needs to be switched to H-back or WR, flat out. Gardner can't be worse at Qb, period. Gardner throws a better ball, he has better mechanics, he can still move the ball on the ground, and he's not a good WR. Denard should be one of the best WRs in the Big 10. Moving him would fix two key areas... It would help our poor WR corps, and it would give us a better thrower at the Qb spot. I really can't see why we're allowing Denard to keep playing Qb, other than he's a "Heisman candidate"... But that's a pipe dream at this point.


October 1st, 2012, 5:02 pm
Post Re: To Tackle or Not to Tackle
I don't know why this team flat out refuses to play Gardner at Qb. Bellamy couldn't get it done, yet they stayed with an inexperienced 18 yr old kid for far too long. Why not let Gardner try to move the ball? He's a better thrower than Dennard, he is more mobile than Bellamy, he knows the system better than Bellamy, and he handles pressure better than Bellamy.

It really seems like Hoke is just afraid that Gardner will actually succeed at Qb this year, and he wants a more traditional Qb next year. It seems to me that Hoke is literally putting his team in a worse position, and holding this team back for "philosophical" reasons... Not the mark of a good coach... I'm frustrated with that whole situation.


October 29th, 2012, 11:14 am
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 13th, 2007, 12:43 pm
Posts: 2753
Post Re: To Tackle or Not to Tackle
I told you, they don't view Gardner as a QB. In their eyes he's a WR.


October 30th, 2012, 8:13 pm
Profile
Post Re: To Tackle or Not to Tackle
Blueskies wrote:
I told you, they don't view Gardner as a QB. In their eyes he's a WR.



I get that as a long-term plan, but Gardner HAS to better than Bellamy right now. To leave Bellamy out there unable to move the ball for an entire 1/2 of football is ridiculous...


That said, I'm not surprised that Hoke is too blind to see it, like I said, IMO he lacks creativity and vision.


October 30th, 2012, 11:56 pm
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 13th, 2007, 12:43 pm
Posts: 2753
Post Re: To Tackle or Not to Tackle
wjb:

Image


November 3rd, 2012, 8:03 pm
Profile
Post Re: To Tackle or Not to Tackle
Blueskies wrote:
wjb:

Image


Ha... Thanks, I guess.

I just wish Hoke would have seen it sooner. If we play him against Nebraska instead of Bellamy and his 2 picks I think that game is a W. I also think we could have beat ND if he played instead of Denard. I can't say that for certain. ND does have a great D, but our WRs were getting open, it was just that Denard's accuracy was HORRIBLE. What maddens me most is how potent I think our offense could be with BOTH Gardner and Denard in our backfield. Direct snaps to Denard, motioning Gardner out to WR, etc. The possibilities would truly be endless.

It would be amazing if we knocked off ND and Nebraska and we were sitting at the top of the Big 10 with 1 loss ranked in the top 13-15 (if we knocked off ND when they were #5 or whatever they were when we played them I think it would be tough not to put UM in the top 15 at least.



On a side note - What was the deal with playing Kennedy instead of Bellamy in the 4th Q? Is Kennedy red-shirted, and Hoke just getting him his snaps in (I know a player can take a certain amount of snaps as a red-shirt and not lose the distinction) while he could? I know it's important for him to be out there and getting experience, but it seemed like we just handed the ball off a ton. I didn't get why we didn't give those snaps to Bellamy.


November 5th, 2012, 2:56 pm
QB Coach
User avatar

Joined: October 26th, 2005, 11:48 pm
Posts: 3039
Location: Elkhart, In.
Post Re: To Tackle or Not to Tackle
ND is overrated, they keep talking potential National Championships, but they can't run with the likes of Oregon State, let alone Bama. I think Michigan is the only the 2nd offense to score 14 or more against Bama this year.

Once ND graduates these seniors they'll settle back down to a mediocre school from the Novia Scotia Iceberg Conference. Yeah you know that big powerhouse football conference that everyone else plays a part of that has a decent shot at LEGITIMATE Bowl rankings.

As an Independent, I think they should get jacked like Boise State does, but you know ND, they'll pay somebody off and get in the Tostitos Bowl or something. They always do. So let's do a U of M/ND rematch in that game eh?

_________________
2 Chronicles 10:14, "if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land."


November 5th, 2012, 3:55 pm
Profile
Post Re: To Tackle or Not to Tackle
WarEr4Christ wrote:
ND is overrated, they keep talking potential National Championships, but they can't run with the likes of Oregon State, let alone Bama. I think Michigan is the only the 2nd offense to score 14 or more against Bama this year.

Once ND graduates these seniors they'll settle back down to a mediocre school from the Novia Scotia Iceberg Conference. Yeah you know that big powerhouse football conference that everyone else plays a part of that has a decent shot at LEGITIMATE Bowl rankings.

As an Independent, I think they should get jacked like Boise State does, but you know ND, they'll pay somebody off and get in the Tostitos Bowl or something. They always do. So let's do a U of M/ND rematch in that game eh?


But they keep beating fairly good teams. Last weeks win was amazing (and amazingly lucky). USC is their only real contest left. If they finish the season undefeated, they'll likely be in the Nat. Championship and get blown out by 20+ points.


November 5th, 2012, 5:05 pm
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 13th, 2007, 12:43 pm
Posts: 2753
Post Re: To Tackle or Not to Tackle
Yeah, I think Bama/Oregon would be the best game. But my gut feeling is that ND gets destroyed by Bama and the game is a total snore fest like last year.

Quote:
I just wish Hoke would have seen it sooner. If we play him against Nebraska instead of Bellamy and his 2 picks I think that game is a W. I also think we could have beat ND if he played instead of Denard. I can't say that for certain. ND does have a great D, but our WRs were getting open, it was just that Denard's accuracy was HORRIBLE. What maddens me most is how potent I think our offense could be with BOTH Gardner and Denard in our backfield. Direct snaps to Denard, motioning Gardner out to WR, etc. The possibilities would truly be endless.

It would be amazing if we knocked off ND and Nebraska and we were sitting at the top of the Big 10 with 1 loss ranked in the top 13-15 (if we knocked off ND when they were #5 or whatever they were when we played them I think it would be tough not to put UM in the top 15 at least.


Don't get ahead of yourself here. It was Minnesota. It was a great game, but MN is a perennial bottom-dweller team.

Also, I don't put the blame on Hoke. Frankly, I think Hoke has little to no input on actual day-to-day football schemes and plans. I think he mostly plays that fortune 500 CEO role, leading with his personality, acting as a figure head, getting the base riled up, attracting donations and recruiting kids. I don't think there's anything wrong with that per-se -- there are many ways to build a winning organization -- but I just think you have to put the blame on Al Borges, who I believe to be the weak link in the coaching staff.


November 6th, 2012, 12:57 am
Profile
QB Coach
User avatar

Joined: August 21st, 2005, 3:36 am
Posts: 3148
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Post Re: To Tackle or Not to Tackle
wjb21ndtown wrote:
WarEr4Christ wrote:
ND is overrated, they keep talking potential National Championships, but they can't run with the likes of Oregon State, let alone Bama. I think Michigan is the only the 2nd offense to score 14 or more against Bama this year.

Once ND graduates these seniors they'll settle back down to a mediocre school from the Novia Scotia Iceberg Conference. Yeah you know that big powerhouse football conference that everyone else plays a part of that has a decent shot at LEGITIMATE Bowl rankings.

As an Independent, I think they should get jacked like Boise State does, but you know ND, they'll pay somebody off and get in the Tostitos Bowl or something. They always do. So let's do a U of M/ND rematch in that game eh?


But they keep beating fairly good teams. Last weeks win was amazing (and amazingly lucky). USC is their only real contest left. If they finish the season undefeated, they'll likely be in the Nat. Championship and get blown out by 20+ points.

I agree that ND is being given more credit than they deserve, but W4C you are undercutting them quite a bit here. They are playing a tough schedule and winning every game. Depending on which ranking you use, they have somewhere from the 7th to the 25th toughest schedule (it averages out to 12.8). Compare that with, oh I don't know how about Oregon (49.8), Kansas St. (27.2), Alabama (19.4), LSU (12.6), Oregon St. (13.6). In fact, of the top 25 in the BCS, only Florida, LSU, and South Carolina have a tougher schedule.

Like I said, I don't think they're on par with Alabama, but if they go undefeated playing one of the tougher schedules amongst the top teams, they deserve a title shot. But, if Oregon goes undefeated they'll get the shot against Alabama. They've had better wins compared to NDs close wins.

_________________
"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." - John Adams

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” - Neil deGrasse Tyson


November 7th, 2012, 4:36 am
Profile
QB Coach
User avatar

Joined: October 26th, 2005, 11:48 pm
Posts: 3039
Location: Elkhart, In.
Post Re: To Tackle or Not to Tackle
You're probably correct, living in the shadow of the Golden dome, I'm nauseous from the lack of reality. But being a Lions fan, I can understnad the delusion, I mean look at where we were at last year, until reality smacked us this year!

ND needs to get into a major conference and quit messing around with this independent status. The reason they backed out of the Big1(2)0 is because they didn't like spreading the profits from the games.

They lose all credibility when they play toilet teams and then make a claim for the NC. But at the same time, the Big 1(2)0 schedule has gone soft in recent years with 3 games being non-conference, generally powderpuff teams.

It pains me to say this, but I REALLY like ND's coach, and he is a Michigan man (even if it is CMU), and Manti Teo is a man of character that I really appreciate. Other than that, you can have em....

_________________
2 Chronicles 10:14, "if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land."


November 7th, 2012, 9:14 am
Profile
QB Coach
User avatar

Joined: August 21st, 2005, 3:36 am
Posts: 3148
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Post Re: To Tackle or Not to Tackle
WarEr4Christ wrote:
You're probably correct, living in the shadow of the Golden dome, I'm nauseous from the lack of reality. But being a Lions fan, I can understnad the delusion, I mean look at where we were at last year, until reality smacked us this year!

ND needs to get into a major conference and quit messing around with this independent status. The reason they backed out of the Big1(2)0 is because they didn't like spreading the profits from the games.

They lose all credibility when they play toilet teams and then make a claim for the NC. But at the same time, the Big 1(2)0 schedule has gone soft in recent years with 3 games being non-conference, generally powderpuff teams.

It pains me to say this, but I REALLY like ND's coach, and he is a Michigan man (even if it is CMU), and Manti Teo is a man of character that I really appreciate. Other than that, you can have em....

ND has zero incentive to join a conference. It would cost them millions of dollars. That's as things stand today. In the future I think you'll see them in the ACC to matchup with the rest of their sports. Also, if playing toilet teams results in teams losing credibility for the NC, then there is no team that has credibility. None. Every team in football plays some softies. That's just a reality. I know you attribute a sort of mythical status to the big ten, but from a outside perspective it's nothing special. No different than the ACC or the big 12: a cop,e good teams and the rest are powder puffs.

_________________
"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." - John Adams

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” - Neil deGrasse Tyson


November 7th, 2012, 10:17 am
Profile
Post Re: To Tackle or Not to Tackle
Blueskies wrote:
Yeah, I think Bama/Oregon would be the best game. But my gut feeling is that ND gets destroyed by Bama and the game is a total snore fest like last year.

Quote:
I just wish Hoke would have seen it sooner. If we play him against Nebraska instead of Bellamy and his 2 picks I think that game is a W. I also think we could have beat ND if he played instead of Denard. I can't say that for certain. ND does have a great D, but our WRs were getting open, it was just that Denard's accuracy was HORRIBLE. What maddens me most is how potent I think our offense could be with BOTH Gardner and Denard in our backfield. Direct snaps to Denard, motioning Gardner out to WR, etc. The possibilities would truly be endless.

It would be amazing if we knocked off ND and Nebraska and we were sitting at the top of the Big 10 with 1 loss ranked in the top 13-15 (if we knocked off ND when they were #5 or whatever they were when we played them I think it would be tough not to put UM in the top 15 at least.


Don't get ahead of yourself here. It was Minnesota. It was a great game, but MN is a perennial bottom-dweller team.

Also, I don't put the blame on Hoke. Frankly, I think Hoke has little to no input on actual day-to-day football schemes and plans. I think he mostly plays that fortune 500 CEO role, leading with his personality, acting as a figure head, getting the base riled up, attracting donations and recruiting kids. I don't think there's anything wrong with that per-se -- there are many ways to build a winning organization -- but I just think you have to put the blame on Al Borges, who I believe to be the weak link in the coaching staff.


As far as Nebraska goes, we may not have gotten the win, but anyone can see that Gardner, at this point in his career, is far superior to Bellamy. That's a fact. Against Nebraska, if Gardner could have came in and just moved the damn ball I think we could have came out of that game with a W. Bellamy looked horrible and forced two INTs after coming into the game, and worse, he couldn't pick up a first down to save his tuckus.

ND is a different story. Gardner may have had just as much trouble with NDs defense, but you have to concede that at the very least it wouldn't have been any worse. What bothers me most about Denard is, he has CRAPPED THE BED in EVERY big game in his career, yet we still trot him out there like he's our savior. I can't stand it.


November 8th, 2012, 3:57 pm
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 13th, 2007, 12:43 pm
Posts: 2753
Post Re: To Tackle or Not to Tackle
Quote:
ND has zero incentive to join a conference.


This is true. The only way to do it, is if the teams banded together and refused to play ND unless it agreed to join a conference. This, of course, will be much harder if ND becomes a strong program again.


November 9th, 2012, 12:41 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.