Fitz is NOT good.

He had one halfway decent year in 2011. Why do people think he's so hot? Are the others that bad?

Who, other than 'hail, likes Fitz? Unfortunately his is our only option at this point. I seriously can't see any other reason why Fitz is still in the backfield on passing downs...

I don't think Fitz is great, but I think he is good. Using this year as an example is a joke, because the O-Line has been disastrous.

I can't, nor won't argue with the O-line comment but other than one year with Denard (when everyone was solely concentrating on Denard) what has he done?

2ndComingOfBo wrote:

I can't, nor won't argue with the O-line comment but other than one year with Denard (when everyone was solely concentrating on Denard) what has he done?

There are two sides to every story. How many more yards and touchdowns could Fitz had if Denard wasn't taking over half the rushes each game?

Fitz was having a decent year last year before his injury. A great year? No, but I've never said Fitz was great. This year, Fitz isn't doing anything.... but no running back in the nation would look good with our offensive line.

True or false... Al Borges is a horrible play caller and his play-calling has crippled the offense all season.

True or false... The offensive line is horrible and their inability to block has crippled the offense all season.

If you answer true to both of those, then how can you criticize a runningback for not looking good? You can't.

hailtoyourvictor wrote:

True or false... Al Borges is a horrible play caller and his play-calling has crippled the offense all season.

True or false... The offensive line is horrible and their inability to block has crippled the offense all season.

If you answer true to both of those, then how can you criticize a runningback for not looking good? You can't.

I think #1 is false.  I thought he called a good game yesterday, but because the o-line was overpowered they didn't execute.

You think Borges is a good play caller?

 

I read 'fishs comment as Borges is not a horrible play-caller, he said nothing of good.

Michigan is the only D1 program that is or should be relevant in the BCS that Borges would be calling the offense.

Michigan simply isn't mature enough to legitimately be mentioned as a contender in the BCS. Is Borges great? No, but I saw nothing wrong with his play-calling yesterday.

2ndComingOfBo wrote:

Michigan simply isn't mature enough to legitimately be mentioned as a contender in the BCS.  Is Borges great?  No, but I saw nothing wrong with his play-calling yesterday.

He didn't call a bag game at all.

He didn't call a bad game yesterday, but the line was despicable. How you can blame Fitz for that is beyond me.

Fitz is the least of our problems.

hail you are actually defending Borges play calling ? did you watch the same game , where were the dump offs and screens and quick passes to wr to negate the sparty rush , we know you love Michigan but stop defending ineptness

A

Meechigan Man wrote:

hail you are actually defending Borges play calling ? did you watch the same game , where were the dump offs and screens and quick passes to wr to negate the sparty rush , we know you love Michigan but stop defending ineptness

Those would not have worked.  The couple screens that were tried lost yards.  MSU was all over everything UM tried.

Sorry guys but Fitz is not the problem. Worse yet Borges is not to blame for yesterday either. The oline is. I don't care who is running the ball, calling the plays or QB. When you have about .5 seconds before the pocket collapses nothing is going to work. That is a fact.

Blaming Borges and Fitz for everything is ignorant. The oline sucks and that was why we lost.

I never said that Fitz was to blame for the sparty loss, not even partially. Other games yes he was a major factor why Michigan couldn't move the ball. However, against sparty was not his fault at all. sparty was in the backfield before Fitz even got the hand-off...

Why do you think my response was even directed at you?

Can't understand how you guys don't think Borges was the problem. 1st it almost look like MSU knew what was comming before the play was called 2nd I think a Middle screen would work . but the back has to at least chip someone comming in. the short Middle route hold the backer so they don't blitz as often, calling a play action pass when its 3 and 15 thats not the cordinator issue, HOG WASH

How many middle screens do you think they should have called? I love when people throw out a couple of plays and think that is an offensive game plan.

SMH-Damn it Borges if you just would have ran a middle screen we would have won the game!

Meechigan Man wrote:

hail you are actually defending Borges play calling ? did you watch the same game , where were the dump offs and screens and quick passes to wr to negate the sparty rush , we know you love Michigan but stop defending ineptness

Can you read? I'm the one saying that Borges blows and the line blows and gave other posters the benefit of the doubt because the biggest problem vs MSU as the line, not Borges' inability to call a game.

2ndComingOfBo wrote:

I never said that Fitz was to blame for the sparty loss, not even partially.  Other games yes he was a major factor why Michigan couldn't move the ball.  However, against sparty was not his fault at all.  sparty was in the backfield before Fitz even got the hand-off...

Really? Which games were those?

'shoes

Penn State specifically but Akron and Uconn as well. The line didn't play that well in those games either but my God man, hit the fricking hole hard. Enough with this juke crap, this isn't High School.

2ndComingOfBo wrote:

Penn State specifically but Akron and Uconn as well.  The line didn't play that well in those games either but my God man, hit the fricking hole hard.  Enough with this juke crap, this isn't High School.

In Mgoblog's UFR (breakdown of every offensive play by reviewing the tape over and over, Fitz graded out to a +6.5. Based on the years they have been doing this -incredibly that was a very high score. He got what the blocking allowed, made the appropriate decisions and cuts and still got only 27 yards in 27 carries. That game was most assuredly NOT his fault.

'shoes

But 2nd says it is so.....

MgoBlue wrote:

How many middle screens do you think they should have called?  I love when people throw out a couple of plays and think that is an offensive game plan.  

SMH-Damn it Borges if you just would have ran a middle screen we would have won the game!  

3 or 4 middle screens would have slowed the pass rush down. a TE screen wouls slow the pass russ down. every freakin play Narduzzi throws a stunt , just about that's the only way to slow things down..

wshoes wrote:

2ndComingOfBo wrote:

Penn State specifically but Akron and Uconn as well.  The line didn't play that well in those games either but my God man, hit the fricking hole hard.  Enough with this juke crap, this isn't High School.

In Mgoblog's UFR (breakdown of every offensive play by reviewing the tape over and over, Fitz graded out to a +6.5. Based on the years they have been doing this -incredibly that was a very high score. He got what the blocking allowed, made the appropriate decisions and cuts and still got only 27 yards in 27 carries. That game was most assuredly NOT his fault.

'shoes

I figured that once Derrick Green when it and had 3 carries for 1 yard people would have dropped the idea that PSU was Fitz's fault. It's as if people don't actually watch the game. Green went in and his first carry was hit immediately after receiving the handoff and tackled for a loss.

hailtoyourvictor wrote:

wshoes wrote:

2ndComingOfBo wrote:

Penn State specifically but Akron and Uconn as well.  The line didn't play that well in those games either but my God man, hit the fricking hole hard.  Enough with this juke crap, this isn't High School.

In Mgoblog's UFR (breakdown of every offensive play by reviewing the tape over and over, Fitz graded out to a +6.5. Based on the years they have been doing this -incredibly that was a very high score. He got what the blocking allowed, made the appropriate decisions and cuts and still got only 27 yards in 27 carries. That game was most assuredly NOT his fault.

'shoes

I figured that once Derrick Green when it and had 3 carries for 1 yard people would have dropped the idea that PSU was Fitz's fault. It's as if people don't actually watch the game. Green went in and his first carry was hit immediately after receiving the handoff and tackled for a loss.

They watch it but then they can't break down what they are seeing. So they reach for the excuse du jour which is blame Borges and Fitz. We could have lost 45-44 and they would still blame those guys.

P.S I am not a Borges apologist. If Borges was fired today I would not lose any sleep over it. I just know it wasn't the play calling that lost us the game.

Fitz had one good year, when as I stated, defenses were mostly concerned about Denard running. He was OK last year until the broken leg but not good. I never have said that the O-line was great, of course with the 3 interior linemen being Freshmen you can't expect anything out of them. However, Fitz should know this (but he doesn't because he is not an outstanding RB like Michigan should have). If the hole that is supposed to be there is not you should know where there is a hole, you don't dance around the line looking for one. I'm not yelling that Fitz should have 100 yards every game but 27 yards on 27 carries screams poor running.