Michigan vs. Indiana Awards

Michigan vs. Indiana Awards


October 4, 2010

Let’s see more of this guy on offense . . . Darryl Stonum as a good kick returner.  Seriously, what happened?  Stonum set a Michigan record for kick return yardage last year.  He has improved as a receiver this year, but the team is #102 in the country in kick returns this season.  It’s not all Stonum’s fault – the blocking hasn’t been there.  But yeesh . . . as I said in yesterday’s post, every unit on the team has been bad except the offense.

Let’s see less of this guy on offense . . . Tate Forcier and Denard Robinson as punters.  It’s not that Tate and Denard have done a bad job of punting.  But the punter position was created for a reason.  If you’re allotting a scholarship for a punter, then use him.  Saturday’s “surprise” punt came from Tate when Michigan was sitting in its own territory on a 4th-and-1.  Just send Hagerup out there and let him kick it.  These “surprise” punts aren’t surprising when the QB lines up 8 yards behind the ball for the shotgun snap and when you run it almost every week.

Let’s see more of this guy on defense . . . Jibreel Black.  He seemed to be getting a decent pass rush throughout the game, which is impressive for a freshman defensive end.  I don’t think he should be the starter because I think he’s a liability against the run right now, but Indiana was a good matchup for him with their 64 pass attempts.

Let’s see less of this guy on defense . . . Jeremy Gallon as punt returner.  Another game, another muffed punt.  Luckily he recovered this one, but man, these punt return experiments just need to end.  I don’t understand why Michigan, with all its athleticism, can’t find a good punt returner.  Gallon has the running skills to be a good returner, but he doesn’t judge punts or catch them well.  Drew Dileo’s redshirt has already been burned, and returning punts is his forte.  Put Dileo back there, or someone else who can at least catch the ball consistently.

MVP of the Indiana game . . . Denard Robinson.  Yet again.  These really are video game numbers.  He finished 10-for-16 for 277 yards and 3 touchdowns.  He also carried the ball 19 times for 217 yards and 2 touchdowns.  And just like the Notre Dame game, he led the game-winning touchdown drive and scored the go-ahead TD.  How ridiculous is 27.7 yards per completion and 11.4 yards per carry?  Pretty ridiculous.

11 comments

  1. Comments: 21387
    Alex
    Oct 04, 2010 at 4:39 PM

    The blocking on kick returns has looked real bad indeed! I can't even count the number of times Stonum has run into his own man around the 20.

    What is keeping Gallon in and Dileo out? It looks to me that Dileo may be even more dangerous as well as having the ability to better field punts.

  2. Comments: 21387
    Oct 04, 2010 at 6:12 PM

    I've always wondered why Mike Shaw isn't being used on kick-off returns.

  3. Comments: 21387
    Oct 04, 2010 at 6:14 PM

    The fake punts work right? Michigan has gotten decent nets out of the punts and have neutralized the likelihood of a return down to zero.

  4. Comments: 21387
    Oct 04, 2010 at 6:14 PM

    Totally agree on Black, he showed ability and a good motor. He never gave up on plays.

  5. Comments: 21387
    Blue in South Bend
    Oct 04, 2010 at 7:59 PM

    Fun fact:

    After the Indiana game, Denard has now eclipsed your (at the time reasonable) predictions for rushing and passing yards for the year, and is one total touchdown short of your prediction.

    I'm not pointing this out as an "I told you so" (after all, who saw THIS coming), but as a opportunity to step back, look at the situation objectively, and say HOLYSHITTHISGUYISAMAZING.

  6. Comments: 21387
    Anonymous
    Oct 05, 2010 at 6:05 AM

    lol magnus dont u dare complain about michigan not being able to find a viable punt returner with all the athleticism on UMs roster. look at texas =(. 2 straight weeks. fuckin ridiculous. did u happen to watch the texas game? i really hope u didnt. we're gonna get embarrassed in lincoln. good luck against msu. really hope u kick the shit out of them. oh and stop including(in the other post) penn state as one of the top teams in the b10. theyre a good name. not a good team.

    -horn

  7. Comments: 21387
    Anonymous
    Oct 05, 2010 at 6:10 AM

    @lankownia with regards to the fake actual punt, sure the net yards is 0 but how much further can ur punter punt the ball compared to tate/denard? sure it works as a pooch punt SOMETIMES but punting from ur own territory? nope. punt the damn ball. tho i will say this: its gonna b funny wen a team puts a player back to return a punt and michigan runs a play with 11v10 men.

    -horn

  8. Comments: 21387
    Oct 05, 2010 at 7:01 PM

    Horn, thats an additional benefit of the call. Perhaps the next time Michgan actually runs a play from the fake punt formation the defense will drop a safety far off the line and open up the play to first down.

    The punter can surely get a longer gain of field position, but he can also give up a return TD. Risk/reward. A pooch is a safe playcall.

  9. Comments: 21387
    Anonymous
    Oct 06, 2010 at 2:58 AM

    ya its got a lower risk but its also got a low reward. a 30 yard punt that has a return of 0 yards is worse than a 50 yard punt with a return of 10 yards. it seems like a waste of scholarship if ur gonna do that every time. u have a punter for a reason, let the kid kick.

    -horn

  10. Comments: 21387
    Oct 06, 2010 at 10:41 PM

    It was a 39 yard punt. Our punter averages 41.

  11. Comments: 21387
    Anonymous
    Oct 07, 2010 at 4:32 AM

    wats the QBs average per punt? i really doubt ur QBs average 39 if ur punter averages 41.

    -horn

You must belogged in to post a comment.