UM vs. Toledo pink slips

Submitted by Magnus on

Michigan's lineup has fluctuated throughout the year, and I expect that it will continue to change until Michigan plays with more consistency - which may not happen until 2009.  Note: Only players who have a viable backup will be chosen to lose their jobs. For example, Threet likely will not be chosen because Sheridan has been a complete disaster.

OFFENSIVE STARTER WHO SHOULD KEEP HIS JOB
Greg Mathews, WR.  I choose Mathews because...well...he's not horrible, despite an unnecessary unnecessary roughness call in the second half of Saturday's game.

OFFENSIVE STARTER WHO SHOULD LOSE HIS JOB
Tie: Sam McGuffie, RB and Toney Clemons, WR.  Before all the McGuffie lovers get their panties in a bunch, I think McGuffie should still be a starter - at slot receiver.  With Martavious Odoms out with an injury and Terrence Robinson seemingly headed for a redshirt, a shakeup is necessary.  Odoms has consistently been able to find soft spots in the defense from the slot position.  McGuffie has similar size and moves and would benefit from being put out into open space.  He has also shown good hands (zero drops this season) and the ability to make people miss.  When Odoms returns from his shoulder injury (presumably next week), he could move into the starting Y receiver position, forming a trio of Mathews, Odoms, and McGuffie as wide receivers.  Toney Clemons dropped two catchable balls on Saturday that led to two interceptions; on top of that, he doesn't have the speed or elusiveness to be effective in the slot.  Moving McGuffie to the slot would allow Brandon Minor (who either scores a TD or fumbles on every touch), Carlos Brown (when he returns from injury), Michael Shaw, and Kevin Grady to get touches out of the backfield.  McGuffie might be our best option at RB, but the backup RB's aren't nearly as bad as the backup slot receivers.

DEFENSIVE STARTER WHO SHOULD KEEP HIS JOB
Brandon Harrison, SS.  Harrison has been Michigan's most reliable defensive back in 2008.  And while no one seemed to play particularly well against Toledo, Harrison was a solid tackler and didn't get beaten in the passing game.  With the lack of push from the defensive line, the linebackers' inconsistency, and the cornerbacks' continued softness, there's not a lot to be excited about at this point.  But when I see #27 flash into the picture, I always feel somewhat relieved that he's going to make a solid tackle or use his sprinter's speed to chase someone down.

DEFENSIVE STARTER WHO SHOULD LOSE HIS JOB
Morgan Trent, CB.  I don't understand Morgan Trent's regression.  He had a promising season a year ago.  He supposedly put on a Barwis-fed 10 pounds and got faster.  He hits people hard.  But he continues to play really soft in coverage and he's been putting his shoulder into ballcarriers instead of wrapping them up and taking them to the ground.  The soft coverage could very well be a scheme of Scott Shafer's or it could be because Trent doesn't trust his safety help.  Either way, it's not working.  Boubacar Cissoko needs to teach Trent how to play physically.  Until Trent steps up his game, Cissoko and Donovan Warren (assuming he returns from injury next week) should be the starting corners.  Maybe a one-game benching would catch Trent's attention.

Comments

Magnus

October 12th, 2008 at 11:22 PM ^

So if two fumbles in a season doesn't influence him being called a "chronic fumbler" then why bring it up?  Lots of running backs fumble twice in a year.  That's not indicative of ball security or lack of it. 

That being said, I agree that he's been a chronic fumbler this year.  I just think that his big play ability - 7.2 yards a carry, 3 TD's, 1 catch for a 27 yard TD - might be worth the risk when the rest of your offense is sputtering.  We can't throw and McGuffie's averaging 3.8 yards a carry or something like that.  That's obviously not working.  Why not try something different?

ShockFX

October 12th, 2008 at 11:29 PM ^

Those are the only 2 fumbles I remember, not necessarily the only 2 he had.

Also, I want Minor to play.  I think he's a great talent.  But everytime he plays, he fumbles the ball!  I've said 100x I support how Rich Rod is playing him until he fumbles in the game.  I don't understand why Rich Rod should continue to play him after he fumbles.  Because he's suddenly not going to fumble afterwards?  He has a limit of one fumble per game?

Magnus

October 12th, 2008 at 11:47 PM ^

Ugh.  We could go back and forth on this all night long.  I can't say with any certainty that he won't fumble, just like you can't say with any certainty that he will fumble.  But when your offense is struggling to put points on the board against teams like Toledo, it's time to try something different.  Just for argument's sake, let's say he continues his current rate of fumbling and big plays.

For every 100 touches, he'll score approximately 18 times (quick math in my head, as I'm about to go to bed).  18 x 7 = 126 pts.

For every 100 touches, he'll fumble the ball 25 times.  If the other team scored a TD every single time he fumbled, that would give them 175 pts.

So the other team would be outscoring us about 7 points to 5 points.  Hmmm...if you turn a couple of those opposing TD's into FG's or turnovers or punts, things start to even out.

Again, I'm not saying this math is 100% accurate.  I know these trends won't hold up for a whole season.  I'm just saying the ploy of using McGuffie 25 times a game and completing 50% of our passes has led to a 2-4 record and at least one extremely embarrassing loss (Toledo).  This entire blog was saying "we keep throwing rock" during Lloyd's last year.  Well...McGuffie is this year's rock.  He's solid, but he hasn't exactly been a big play guy.

mth822

October 12th, 2008 at 10:06 PM ^

  1. There are patterns that exist though in nature or in people. Some call them synchronicities or odd, random occurrences. Sometimes though people will try to correlate things that are not really able to correlated. But sometimes you go for the alludes, the subtle things that show up time and time again. And I know people will rip this from every angle as bs and a straw argument. But I'll post this other heart breaker of a game from Rich's career. The score was 13-9 instead of 13-10. And I know people will say,"Total bs and straw argument, apples to oranges crap." And you're right, but I was just looking back through the WV years. In this article I saw similarities in turnovers(fumbled kick-offs and letdown performances. I also heard the phrase,'Nightmare," by Rodriguez. That is why I commented on Lucid dreaming in another post.) You have to realize that you are not your shadow, you project your shadow outwards. Anyhow here the NY TIMES article And in this article the only things that jumped out at me were the phrases: 
  2. "In the aftermath of Pittsburgh’s 13-9 victory against the Mountaineers, the final salvo in a season defined by inexplicable upsets, Rodriguez’s comments provided a fitting description for the college football world. “It was a nightmare,” he said of his team’s squandering the opportunity to play for its first-ever national title. “The whole thing was a nightmare." 
  3. “We picked a bad time to play our worst game offensively in years,” Rodriguez said." 
  4. There were two chilling signs that the Mountaineers, who were favored by four touchdowns, could lose. The first came last week after that Connecticut game when Huskies Coach Randy Edsall issued this missive. “The only way they lose is if they turn the ball over,” Edsall said. “If you don’t get turnovers on them, ain’t nobody going to beat them.” 
  5. The Mountaineers lost three fumbles. The most costly came when Vaughn Rivers fumbled the opening kickoff of the second half. That led to Pittsburgh’s only touchdown, a Pat Bostick 1-yard plunge set up by a fake punt on fourth-and-1.
  6. So instead of 3 fumbles, it was 3 interceptions. Instead of a dislocated thumb on your QB's hand, it was a hurt elbow. Instead of fumbling a kickoff and giving up your only TD that way, Threet throws and Interception which goes 100 yards. Instead of being highly ranked, you lose your bowl streak and record to the MAC. So enjoy, not meant to be serious stuff. 
  7.  http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/02/sports/ncaafootball/02mountaineers.ht…

Anonymous Coward (not verified)

October 13th, 2008 at 12:37 AM ^

you've got to be kidding: Minor is a fumbler. No RB in a Michigan uniform has fumbled more recently. Saying he's a good player except for the fumbles is like saying 'except for the assassination, how was the play Mrs. Lincoln?' At his best (last year), Minor fumbled ~2.5% of his carries. You've gotta run like Eric Dickerson to accept that, and Minor is no Dickerson. AT his worst, (this year), he fumbles 25% of his touches. That's not acceptable even if you run as Barry Sanders does. Others have noted the anomaly and it isn't the fumbling. The anomaly is the big production. In years past, Minor has traditionally beat up on weak teams and gotten totally stuffed against anybody with a pulse. He may be a slightly better runner than the others, but not that much better. It's not worth the extra fumbles.

Anonymous Coward (not verified)

October 13th, 2008 at 1:26 AM ^

Please pull Trent! He may be fast, but that is the only thing going for him. His coverage is awful and all our opponents know a throw in his general direction is bound to make them a big play.

Anonymous Coward (not verified)

October 13th, 2008 at 10:21 AM ^

I just wasted minutes of my day reading through these ridiculous posts. I should be punished - oh wait - my punishment was reading this.