Online Now 394

Wolverine247 Board

The place for discussion on the Michigan Wolverines

Online now 174
Record: 7264 (3/12/2012)

Reply

Way too early Top 25

  • NigelUno said... (original post)

    First, Dantonio has been sure to get Maxwell meaningful snaps over the past two years, and he enters next year as more 'battle-tested' and prepared than Kirk Cousins was the first year he started.

    Now, factor in that Cousins was a better passer and offensive commander (by the eye test as well as statistically) in his first year starting than Denard was in this 2011 season, and I feel comfortable that Maxwell will be a better QB than Denard.

    Once Denard crosses the line of scrimmage, he might as well be a RB. His rushing yards are definitely a huge bonus, and significantly beneficial, but he will be at a substantial disadvantage in many situations that require a passing game while *gasp* the WR's are tightly covered. Good cornerbacks are usually pretty good at playing 500, and it showed this year.

    Sorry, but that is laughable. Being a starting QB and playing every game of the entire season is entirely different than coming in for a series here and there during garbage time when the outcome is no longer in question. And the last time I checked, Maxwell doesn't show up on anyone's short list for the 2012 Heisman. Maxwell might turn out to be a fine QB, but projecting him as better than a a highly respected two-year returning starter is pure homerism. It is not based in fact or objective judgment. If you can do that, then I guess we can just clam our replacements on the DL are going to be clearly better than your returning starters. It makes the entire conversation a joke.

  • NigelUno said... (original post)

    You have to do one of 2 things here. You either add Denard's rushing numbers into his passing stats and get an overall level of QB play. Or you have to add Denard's rushing into our RB game and then the RB comparison wouldn't even be close seeing we would be returning 2 1000 yard rushers. You can't just ignore the fact that Denard rushed for over 1000 yards this year. It needs to be taken into account when you are comparing teams.

    Yea, it's probably better to just look at the "Run Game" and the "Pass Game" overall. UM has a clear edge in the run game.

    The passing game . . . it's really up to Borges. Clearly Robinson is not a drop-back passer, but that doesn't mean he has to suck as a college QB. His #s were down across the board (there were some calls in the preseason that he'd throw for over 3000 yards . . . yikes), but there's usually a bump in the 2nd year of a system. I don't know what to make of the abscess on his arm thing, but generally a guy in full health is better than not.

    MSU's passing game is a question mark, no doubt about it. Could it be better than UM's? Sure, it could also be dead last in the conference. I gotta see what Maxwell does in the spring, and really against Boise and ND, before I can make any decent judgment call on him.

    Michigan State does not and will not run the 3-4 defense.

  • Jandy

    SpartanRocky said... (original post)

    I'd put DT at a push: both squads loose a lot on the interior, though I'd say White is more proven than any of the UM replacements. Both front 4s are best when they have 4 DTs to rotate and I don't think either group of fans knows what that group will be at the moment.

    S is also a push for me: Kovacs is a pure gamer and probably a wash with Lewis in terms of overall production (Kovacs is great at forcing fumbles, Lewis had 2 pick-6s this season). MSU has had 2 promising young S play significant minutes this year (Drummond and Jairus Jones), but neither have had to play a full game.

    I can see your point at DT, Rock. I guess I just read more into the movement of Reynolds to the OL...

    With regards to S, no qualms with your points there. It was the position that I went back and forth the most on.

  • NigelUno said... (original post)

    First, Dantonio has been sure to get Maxwell meaningful snaps over the past two years, and he enters next year as more 'battle-tested' and prepared than Kirk Cousins was the first year he started.

    Now, factor in that Cousins was a better passer and offensive commander (by the eye test as well as statistically) in his first year starting than Denard was in this 2011 season, and I feel comfortable that Maxwell will be a better QB than Denard.

    Once Denard crosses the line of scrimmage, he might as well be a RB. His rushing yards are definitely a huge bonus, and significantly beneficial, but he will be at a substantial disadvantage in many situations that require a passing game while *gasp* the WR's are tightly covered. Good cornerbacks are usually pretty good at playing 500, and it showed this year.

    Meaningful snaps? Like getting knocked out of the game against Bama? More battle tested, I think Rocky used that same type of line since Maxwell has something like 8 more passes than Cousins did before he becamse the starter.

    Factor in that Michigan still runs out of the spread most of the time and Denard has another >1000yds and 16 tds.

    Um, every QB becomes a RB once they pass the line of scrimmage.

  • SpartanRocky said... (original post)

    Yea, it's probably better to just look at the "Run Game" and the "Pass Game" overall. UM has a clear edge in the run game.

    The passing game . . . it's really up to Borges. Clearly Robinson is not a drop-back passer, but that doesn't mean he has to suck as a college QB. His #s were down across the board (there were some calls in the preseason that he'd throw for over 3000 yards . . . yikes), but there's usually a bump in the 2nd year of a system. I don't know what to make of the abscess on his arm thing, but generally a guy in full health is better than not.

    MSU's passing game is a question mark, no doubt about it. Could it be better than UM's? Sure, it could also be dead last in the conference. I gotta see what Maxwell does in the spring, and really against Boise and ND, before I can make any decent judgment call on him.

    I fully expect Maxwell and the Spartan passing game to put up at least comparable stats to what Denard and Michigan does next year. Like i said it really depends on what you want to do with Denard's rushing numbers on how you evaluate the passing and run games. In my mind Denard's rushing numbers will give him the edge in overall QB play.

    signature image signature image signature image
  • SpartanRocky said... (original post)

    Yea, it's probably better to just look at the "Run Game" and the "Pass Game" overall. UM has a clear edge in the run game.

    The passing game . . . it's really up to Borges. Clearly Robinson is not a drop-back passer, but that doesn't mean he has to suck as a college QB. His #s were down across the board (there were some calls in the preseason that he'd throw for over 3000 yards . . . yikes), but there's usually a bump in the 2nd year of a system. I don't know what to make of the abscess on his arm thing, but generally a guy in full health is better than not.

    MSU's passing game is a question mark, no doubt about it. Could it be better than UM's? Sure, it could also be dead last in the conference. I gotta see what Maxwell does in the spring, and really against Boise and ND, before I can make any decent judgment call on him.

    From a returning player standpoint, MSU's passing game is non-existent. You are losing your three-year starting QB and multi-year starting WRs in Cunningham, Nichol and Martin. And your TE in Linthecum. We actually have most of our passing game back. We lose our best WR and TE but everyone else is back.

  • Jandy

    NigelUno said... (original post)

    You have to do one of 2 things here. You either add Denard's rushing numbers into his passing stats and get an overall level of QB play. Or you have to add Denard's rushing into our RB game and then the RB comparison wouldn't even be close seeing we would be returning 2 1000 yard rushers. You can't just ignore the fact that Denard rushed for over 1000 yards this year. It needs to be taken into account when you are comparing teams.

    That's a fair point, and as Rocky states, this gives UM the clear advantage in the rushing attack.

  • Jandy

    xxmgobluexx said... (original post)

    Meaningful snaps? Like getting knocked out of the game against Bama? More battle tested, I think Rocky used that same type of line since Maxwell has something like 8 more passes than Cousins did before he becamse the starter.

    Factor in that Michigan still runs out of the spread most of the time and Denard has another >1000yds and 16 tds.

    Um, every QB becomes a RB once they pass the line of scrimmage.

    Maxwell is more battle tested than Cousins was b/c he'll have had a 3rd year in the system before being asked to start, and will have had in-game snaps over a two season period before that as well. If you're honestly comparing the experience of Maxwell and Cousins at the time of their first starts, it shouldn't be close. Even if Maxwell only took 5 more snaps than Cousins, he had an entire extra season with the team to get acquainted with teammates, learn the system, and establish connections with his receivers. Even just the extra year with the system by itself aught to be a valued experience as that is generally the only reason people have to believe Denard will be anything better than a below-average passer (another year in the system).

    I understand that every QB becomes a RB once they pass the line of scrimmage. My point was that those yards aren't additionally useful b/c it's Denard, they are simply additional rushing yards. The problem is that there is a grey area with the terminology that we began with, causing debate over what stats are credited to Denard the QB and what stats (if any) are credited to...I don't know...'Denard the athlete-running-back-playmaker'...
    Just arguing semantics at this point.

  • Jandy

    NigelUno said... (original post)

    I fully expect Maxwell and the Spartan passing game to put up at least comparable stats to what Denard and Michigan does next year. Like i said it really depends on what you want to do with Denard's rushing numbers on how you evaluate the passing and run games. In my mind Denard's rushing numbers will give him the edge in overall QB play.

    Right, and that's fair. I guess that's what I was kind of getting at with my original statement way back when. In my mind, Denard the QB isn't always valued the same as Denard the playmaker/rusher.

    The reasoning for this could be as simple as the fact that I know Denard is a phenomenal player, but I personally don't see that in his pure quarterback play, so I separate his skill sets in my mind to get a better grasp on him as an overall player.

  • NigelUno said... (original post)

    Maxwell is more battle tested than Cousins was b/c he'll have had a 3rd year in the system before being asked to start, and will have had in-game snaps over a two season period before that as well. If you're honestly comparing the experience of Maxwell and Cousins at the time of their first starts, it shouldn't be close. Even if Maxwell only took 5 more snaps than Cousins, he had an entire extra season with the team to get acquainted with teammates, learn the system, and establish connections with his receivers. Even just the extra year with the system by itself aught to be a valued experience as that is generally the only reason people have to believe Denard will be anything better than a below-average passer (another year in the system).

    I understand that every QB becomes a RB once they pass the line of scrimmage. My point was that those yards aren't additionally useful b/c it's Denard, they are simply additional rushing yards. The problem is that there is a grey area with the terminology that we began with, causing debate over what stats are credited to Denard the QB and what stats (if any) are credited to...I don't know...'Denard the athlete-running-back-playmaker'...
    Just arguing semantics at this point.

    More time in a system =/= battle tested. Only real time game experience does that.

    I guess you can look at it anyway you want in regards to Denards stats, I see them combined, he is a spread QB, not a pocket passing QB.

    This post was edited by xxmgobluexx 2 years ago

  • NigelUno said... (original post)

    Right, and that's fair. I guess that's what I was kind of getting at with my original statement way back when. In my mind, Denard the QB isn't always valued the same as Denard the playmaker/rusher.

    The reasoning for this could be as simple as the fact that I know Denard is a phenomenal player, but I personally don't see that in his pure quarterback play, so I separate his skill sets in my mind to get a better grasp on him as an overall player.

    Does pure QB = pocket passer in your eyes? To me, he is a great "pure" QB for the spread.

  • Jandy

    xxmgobluexx said... (original post)

    Does pure QB = pocket passer in your eyes? To me, he is a great "pure" QB for the spread.

    In the what I was referencing here, yes, I was referring to the passing aspect of his game.

  • xxmgobluexx said... (original post)

    Things I see differently.

    RBs = Push, though plural gives Michigan the edge. Who behind Bell is better? Caper? Nope, I went round and round with Rocky on this last summer, and Caper has yet to have a season where he averages at least 4 ypc. Hill? Same as Caper, he can't even break the 4 ypc mark either. Michigan has Smith who has 1175 yds for his career at over 5 ypc. Rawls and Hayes backing them up.

    WRs = Michigan. Before you claim MSU has better WRs, tell me how many total career catches your WRs have caught in a Spartan uniform. Michigan has Roundtree with 123 catches and Gallon with 35 catches. That isn't including Stonum who has 76 career catches.

    OT = Michigan. Not as close as you think. Lewan will be All-B1G 1st team. Schofield natural position is RT and will finally be playing there. This isn't close.

    Interior Oline = Push. Michigan is replacing its best interior guy in Molk, same as MSU replacing its best interior guy in Foreman. Michigan has 3 year starter RG Omameh(sp) and Barnum back. There is talk of Barnum moving to Center to make room for 350 lb Bryant(if he can lose some of that weight) or 5* Kalis or potentially Garnett.

    DT =MSU. MSU having to replace Worthy and Pickelman hurts them, but at least White has seen some solid minutes and starts. Michigans guys are all potential right now.

    DE = MSU. They have the edge because of Michigan's questions at SDE. Michigan will have Roh, Black and Clark returning at WDE, if Roh can put on a good 10lbs, he can move to SDE and help with spot.

    OLB = push to slight edge MSU. This is all homer, I think Ryan is a stud like you guys love Allen. Morgan at WLB hurts Michigan.

    CB = Push. I think Countess is going to be a stud, with RS Senior Floyd on the other side. Playing as a true Freshman this year, next year the speed of the game will be slowed down for Countess and he becomes a shutdown corner.

    S = Push. Michigan gets both of its safeties back, MSU is losing a starter.

    I don't know how you could even consider OLB and CB a push. We have possibly the best CB in the Big Ten in Adams and Dennard was a second teamer. We have the best CB tandem in the Big Ten without question.

    OLB is also the best in the league with both starters coming back who dominated at times. Then you throw in LT who has looked like a freak in practice, many comparing him to a Will G type of dominate player. I'll give you OT but overall State has the better line as you have zero depth. We return four of five starters, two starters that didn't play this year due to injury, Jack Allen looks to be a stud, and Henry Conway (who coaches said at one point could be a 1st team all big ten) is finally healthy.

    I try and be very unbiased but I think next years team could be the best in MSU history. So much talent.

    signature image signature image

    Michigan State University is the university of Michigan

  • Bailey1149 said... (original post)

    I don't know how you could even consider OLB and CB a push. We have possibly the best CB in the Big Ten in Adams and Dennard was a second teamer. We have the best CB tandem in the Big Ten without question.

    OLB is also the best in the league with both starters coming back who dominated at times. Then you throw in LT who has looked like a freak in practice, many comparing him to a Will G type of dominate player. I'll give you OT but overall State has the better line as you have zero depth. We return four of five starters, two starters that didn't play this year due to injury, Jack Allen looks to be a stud, and Henry Conway (who coaches said at one point could be a 1st team all big ten) is finally healthy.

    I try and be very unbiased but I think next years team could be the best in MSU history. So much talent.

    Unbiased opinion = Best MSU team in history. roflmao

    I would hate to see your biased opinion on the best CB tandem, OLBs and oline, "without question". lol

  • Way too early for this b*tchfest between our opposing fanbases. Both schools have good teams coming back... we will find out in the fall who is better.

  • xxmgobluexx said... (original post)

    More time in a system =/= battle tested. Only real time game experience does that.

    I guess you can look at it anyway you want in regards to Denards stats, I see them combined, he is a spread QB, not a pocket passing QB.

    Well, using his logic, Gardner is the equivalent of Maxwell. And since Denard is better than Gardner (because he is ahead of him on the depth chart), Denard must be better than Maxwell. It's the transitive property!

  • Jandy

    MrWoodson said... (original post)

    Well, using his logic, Gardner is the equivalent of Maxwell. And since Denard is better than Gardner (because he is ahead of him on the depth chart), Denard must be better than Maxwell. It's the transitive property!

    well, of course that doesn't take into account whatsoever the fact that Maxwell has always been a better passer than Denard with a much better arm. I mean, let's not beat around the bush, if Denard wasn't so elusive/crafty/fast, he wouldn't be the starting QB. It's not a big deal, it just means that the passing aspects of these two at quarterback are going to be very different, as they should be.

  • Jandy

    TheDudeAbides21 said... (original post)

    Way too early for this b*tchfest between our opposing fanbases. Both schools have good teams coming back... we will find out in the fall who is better.

    Why all the pessimism?! It's never too early!!

  • TheDudeAbides21 said... (original post)

    Way too early for this b*tchfest between our opposing fanbases. Both schools have good teams coming back... we will find out in the fall who is better.

    baby

  • When you compare each position between MSU to UM, its like comparing apples to oranges. So I just look at it at comparing Pass/Rush Offenses and Defenses

    Pass Offense: Edge MSU. I know this is not going to go over well by the Michigan fans because MSU has a whole new unit in QB and WR's. MSU plays a pro style offense where Michigan is a run first team. Both QB's will struggle racking up passing yards and avoiding interceptions. Michigan simply is not a good passing team. Denard is usually the best playmaker on the field regardless of what team they are playing, but he flat out is not a good QB. This past year exposed Denard as a QB.

    Rush Offense: Edge Michigan and its not even close. 2 returning 1,000 yard rushers. I expect 2 more 1,000 yard rushers next year. Bell is going to be solid for MSU behind an experienced line, but anyone who can put together a legitimate argument for MSU on this one is out of their mind.

    Pass Defense: Push. Yes Countess will improve to be an all big ten CB under Mattison and Floyd has good experience. Kovacs always seems to be where the ball is and has great football instincts. Johnny Adams and Darqueze Dennard are both experienced corners however are prone to the PI call. Isaiah Lewis returns as a solid playmaker but seemed to come up short in big situations.

    Rush Defense: Edge MSU. MSU has a plug in the middle with AR White and DE's with huge motors in Rush and Gholston. All LB's return, Bullough, Allen and 3 year starter Chris Norman. Will be interesting to how much PT Lawrence Thomas gets and how he performs. Ryan, Roh and Demens are all sure tacklers and I love Kovacs run support from the secondary. He seems to always have that 3rd or 4th and short stop on the pitch to the edge. Still MSU has too much talent to give Michigan the nod on this one.

  • NigelUno said... (original post)

    well, of course that doesn't take into account whatsoever the fact that Maxwell has always been a better passer than Denard with a much better arm. I mean, let's not beat around the bush, if Denard wasn't so elusive/crafty/fast, he wouldn't be the starting QB. It's not a big deal, it just means that the passing aspects of these two at quarterback are going to be very different, as they should be.

    Sorry, I must have missed that. What are their QB passer scores again, I mean when they took that QB passer test everyone watched?

  • Jandy

    MrWoodson said... (original post)

    Sorry, I must have missed that. What are their QB passer scores again, I mean when they took that QB passer test everyone watched?

    Andrew got an A, Denard got a D. Rumor has it that Denard fumbling with his shoelaces for over 6 minutes made analysts believe that he had poor hands.

  • xxmgobluexx said... (original post)

    More time in a system =/= battle tested. Only real time game experience does that.

    I guess you can look at it anyway you want in regards to Denards stats, I see them combined, he is a spread QB, not a pocket passing QB.

    I agree that his running stats are "QB" stats. The reason being, there are times where some other team with a conventional, drop back QB may run a pass play on certain down and distance. Where with Denard there, maybe have a run/pass option. 3rd and 4 could be a run When Denard is QB where with Maxwell it could be a quick out or slant? either way the QB will be responsible for the outcome.

    signature image
  • NigelUno said... (original post)

    Why all the pessimism?! It's never too early!!

    It's not pessimism, I just don't understand it from either side. Trying too "win" an argument on internet? Reality is... we will find out in the fall.

  • CWoodtheGreat said... (original post)

    I agree that his running stats are "QB" stats. The reason being, there are times where some other team with a conventional, drop back QB may run a pass play on certain down and distance. Where with Denard there, maybe have a run/pass option. 3rd and 4 could be a run When Denard is QB where with Maxwell it could be a quick out or slant? either way the QB will be responsible for the outcome.

    I have an idea. Why don't we just acknowledge that the guy who has started for two years and played pretty well will continue to do so, and the one who will be starting his first college football game will probably perform about as well as most first-time starting college QBs? And, FWIW, it's not like Maxwell was even ranked all that highly coming out of HS (36th QB on Scout). Maybe he throws well, maybe he doesn't. Maybe he makes good decisions, maybe he doesn't. The fact that he has been riding the pine for three years is hardly a reason for believing that he is some superstar who will be one of the best QBs in the league as soon as he hits the gridiron.