Michigan quarterback Denard Robinson among early Heisman Trophy hopefuls
Denard Robinson finds himself in a familiar position today.
After seeing his name mentioned among the Heisman Trophy frontrunners for the bulk of the 2010 season, the Michigan quarterback is again among the favorites for college football’s highest honor.
Denard Robinson is once again expected to be a Heisman Trophy contender next season. Melanie Maxwell I AnnArbor.com
Melanie Maxwell I AnnArbor.com
Robinson was among 22 players named to a preseason Heisman watch list by HeismanPundit.com on Tuesday.
He’s one of four Big Ten players named to the list. Wisconsin running backs Montee Ball and James White both made the cut, along with Nebraska quarterback Taylor Martinez.
Robinson has plenty of company from other quarterbacks. Thirteen were among the hopefuls.
One who wasn’t stood out: Northwestern quarterback Dan Persa, who won first-team all-Big Ten honors ahead of Robinson last season.
Comments
mdoggy
Mon, Feb 28, 2011 : 6:56 p.m.
Denard is a great player with alot of potential.... But he is an even better teammate and person! Heisman trophys were, at one time, about integrity an your playing abilities... Kid would win hands down if that was the way everyone voted... Glad we got him on our team thats for sure. Go blue!
wolfman
Mon, Feb 28, 2011 : 2:58 a.m.
Bo will be watching
lockhunt
Thu, Feb 24, 2011 : 6:22 a.m.
im planning to install parking sensors both rear and front(with display on rear view mirror). Please suggest some guidelines/tips to be followed during the installation ================================================= cheap used cars
missionbrazil
Wed, Feb 23, 2011 : 11:58 p.m.
Theo "Again, if we see one snap in the pro set during the spring game, we can all spend our Crystal Bowl money on something worth while, like lobbying for a new coach!!!!" Wow, Theo and the gang trashed everyone because whatshisname didn't get 5 years at UM, and now he's ready to look for a new coach after the spring game. Can anyone say hypocrisy ? Not surprising though.
beanie wells
Wed, Feb 23, 2011 : 10:18 p.m.
heisman looks to be a long shot for denard... but, who knows? maybe borges will create a offense that will not be as vanilla as the ones during those dark days under lloyd carr. i, for one, will be very interested to see how denard progresses as a QB... especially as one in a pro-style offense. he seems like a likable kid. i'd like to see him actually get a shot at playing at the next level.
missionbrazil
Wed, Feb 23, 2011 : 5:52 p.m.
DonAZ "Further, to the point about the Heisman ... there's little chance of anyone winning the Heisman if the team (gasp! that word again) doesn't also do well and garner enough wins. Robinson can shatter records in 2011 but if Michigan goes 6-6 (or whatever) he ... will ... NOT ... win ... the ... Heisman. Guaranteed." That is absolutely correct DonAZ. Great point, and also very on-point in this thread (regardless of what Dusty says). When we were 5-0 last year against weaker teams DR was at the top of the Heisman list, but when we went 2-5 (plus the ugly bowl loss after the Heisman vote) after that he had NO chance to win it. He disappeared off the list completely.
Dusty
Fri, Feb 25, 2011 : 12:39 a.m.
"That is absolutely correct DonAZ. Great point, and also very on-point in this thread (regardless of what Dusty says)." He actually made that point AFTER I disputed his first point. Feel free to follow along properly.
Theo212
Wed, Feb 23, 2011 : 5:21 p.m.
Once there was Crystal, Now there is none. Now there is boredom, Gone is the fun. Borges and Hoke, Please listen here. A backwards pro set, Is what we all fear. Cast out tradition! Vanquish the old! 'Tis now Modern Era; One needs to be bold! (Again, if we see one snap in the pro set during the spring game, we can all spend our Crystal Bowl money on something worth while, like lobbying for a new coach!!!!)
1st Down
Wed, Feb 23, 2011 : 11:43 p.m.
Hey....do they award crystal for 7th place in the BT finishes? Some people are just clueless.
Blu n Tpa
Wed, Feb 23, 2011 : 3:16 p.m.
Dusty tater Would you rather have a single player win an award or the whole team win games vs good teams on a regular basis? I'm having a problem finding a Heisman winner who played on a average team in recent history. Randal El should have won when he was at Indiana, but DIDN"T. And playing at Michigan doesn't hurt your chances of winning an award, does it? Let's see, Michigan players have won 10% of the Heisman's given out in the last 20 years! Being a better QB will help him compete for the award, and it will make Michigan a better football team. Can you say "Win-Win"?
Dusty
Fri, Feb 25, 2011 : 12:38 a.m.
"I will repeat for the 100th time the most damning thing I heard in 2010, and it was from a player on the Mississippi State defense: "This was not hard. We knew exactly what they were going to do."" How is this "damning"? This reminds me of something somebody on the Michigan defense said after the MSU game. "The coaches did a good job. We knew exactly what they were going to do. We just couldn't stop it." Sounds to me like knowing what is coming and being able to stop it are two entirely different things. It also sounds to me like Michigan's offense was no more or less predictable than Michigan State's offense. And if you think the read option offense is any more predictable than that pathetic excuse for an offense Lloyd Carr ran while he was here, then your football IQ is in the toilet.
DonAZ
Wed, Feb 23, 2011 : 10:07 p.m.
"Bashing Denard and what Denard has accomplished despite the struggles of the rest of the team just because you don't like the old coach is pretty sad." Who's bashing Denard? There's a difference between lack-of-affirmation and bashing. I am relatively quiet on the merits of Denard Robinson ... he's a good player and I think he can get much better. But I do not think he is, as yet, a *great* player. Great players make great plays, make great decisions, elevate others and bring to the table a set of intangibles that win games. Robinson made some great plays, some average ones, made some good decisions and many poor ones. That's not "bashing" Robinson. It's offering a relatively measured and practical review of Robinson as a player in 2010. I'd rather have Robinson on the team than not. But, that said, I think there's far more upside potential for Robinson if he were more effectively employed. I will repeat for the 100th time the most damning thing I heard in 2010, and it was from a player on the Mississippi State defense: "This was not hard. We knew exactly what they were going to do." No talent is capable of overcoming 11 men on defense when they know what the upcoming play is going to be. Ask Barry Sanders. Now I will admit to bashing Rodriguez. History will not treat him well. Not at all.
Blu n Tpa
Wed, Feb 23, 2011 : 9:24 p.m.
I beg to differ but I wrote "would you rather" so there is one, no matter how you dispute it. (It's right there, see?) Who was "bashing" anyone? I didn't see anything about the WCiFMH here either until you so tastelessly brought him up. DRob knows he will stand out BETTER if Michigan is winning. He's already on board with the offense being firmly set on his shoulder, and above, and less on his legs. My guess is he knows what you ignore. Highlight plays mean more when you're on the winning team.
Dusty
Wed, Feb 23, 2011 : 3:55 p.m.
There is no "would you rather" here. The fact is we have Denard. He's here, and he's a special talent. Regardless of the focus of the team, he's likely going to stand out. Individual players being on the watch list for individual awards has nothing to do with the rest of the team. Bashing Denard and what Denard has accomplished despite the struggles of the rest of the team just because you don't like the old coach is pretty sad.
truebluefan
Wed, Feb 23, 2011 : 4:12 a.m.
BorninA2 wrote -- "By "the bulk" do you mean the first five of the thirteen games they played? Upon reaching the non-creampuff part of the schedule, they started losing, Denard was playing hurt, and opposing teams figured out how to defend our one-trick offense. He had a good season, but let's not rewrite history." He had a "good" season? How about one of the best ever statistically for a Michigan QB. And the best, by far, of any first year starter in Michigan history. So, yeah, I'd call that at least "good".
truebluefan
Thu, Feb 24, 2011 : 3:47 a.m.
Also, in the college game I'll take a dual threat QB like Denard any day of the week and twice on Sunday over a drop back statue.
truebluefan
Thu, Feb 24, 2011 : 3:42 a.m.
Don - he didn't lead the nation in any statistic but he was in the top 10 or 15 of every meaningful passing category. And oh, by the way, Denard was also the second or third leading rusher in the country. You are not from this planet if you don't call that great. And if Michigan's defense was better and Michigan won just one more game, Denard would've been in New York. Guaranteed. Don't discredit Denard because Michigan's defense was horrible.
BlueSince62
Thu, Feb 24, 2011 : 12:37 a.m.
The last Heisman winner at UM played on defense. The only defensive player to ever win a Heisman. A team player that stood out, and still does. Offensive stats are consolation for teams that lose the game.
DonAZ
Wed, Feb 23, 2011 : 4:52 p.m.
I'm not "whining" ... I'm simply explaining. Here's where most on this site seem unable to follow subtlety: I like Denard and think he's very good, but I do not think him a *great* player ... yet. He did *not* lead the nation in any offensive statistic. True. Look it up. Further, to the point about the Heisman ... there's little chance of anyone winning the Heisman if the team (gasp! that word again) doesn't also do well and garner enough wins. Robinson can shatter records in 2011 but if Michigan goes 6-6 (or whatever) he ... will ... NOT ... win ... the ... Heisman. Guaranteed.
Dusty
Wed, Feb 23, 2011 : 3:57 p.m.
No, what is *really* the point here is that Denard is a great player, who broke major Big Ten records as a sophomore in his first season starting. Despite injury. Despite being the only serious threat on the team. Despite playing for what you call a bad coach. You can whine about how insignificant it is compared to the overall production of the team, but the article is about the Heisman trophy and why he's on the watch list.
DonAZ
Wed, Feb 23, 2011 : 2:28 p.m.
Okay ... I reiterate: "Robinson's stats are relatively meaningless. Individual stats with a mediocre team record means one-dimensionality." That's *really* the point here -- as good as Robinson's season was (good, not *great* ... his individual stats do not lead the country in any category I could find), those stats fade to insignificance if the team itself does not do well.
Dusty
Wed, Feb 23, 2011 : 7:27 a.m.
DonAZ, you keep bringing up team achievements when this article and most of the people responding to it are talking specifically about Denard. Stay on topic, would you please?
DonAZ
Wed, Feb 23, 2011 : 4:43 a.m.
And yet we were still only 7-5, with losses to our key foes -- Wisconsin, Iowa, MSU and OSU. Robinson's stats are relatively meaningless. Individual stats with a mediocre team record means one-dimensionality. And I will repeat -- time and again -- that any time a QB leads a team in rushing it's a bad, bad thing. It suggests no other offensive rushing weapons. Which means defensives don't have to worry about anyone but the QB. Which means focus on the QB and you close down the offense. And that's what Wisconsin, Iowa, MSU, PSU and OSU did.
Mick
Wed, Feb 23, 2011 : 2:39 a.m.
I'm looking forward to the spring game to really get an idea of what our Offense is going to look like, let alone wonder what sort of stats DR is going to get to even be in the Heisman race as the season goes on. I'm hoping DR does great and really flourishes in the the type of O we're going to run. But, if he struggles for some reason, don't forget we have a pretty good QB backing him up. Gardner is bigger and also athletic, don't count him out just yet. I also love this Bellomy kid we got coming in.
azwolverine
Wed, Feb 23, 2011 : 2:37 a.m.
It's nice to see Denard's name mentioned, but honestly I'm far more concerned with team goals than I am individual ones...and in that regard I think we're light years ahead of where we were just 2 months ago. Further, it should be nice not to see THIS in the upcoming season: 4th down - miss FG OR 4th down - get STUFFED 5 times in one game. Ahh...the good 'ol days of a punishing running game are returning...and ultimately Robinson and the whole team will be the better for it. Go Blue!
DonAZ
Wed, Feb 23, 2011 : 1:44 a.m.
Not a chance, and it doesn't matter. Hoke's focus ... Robinson's focus ... Michigan's focus ... is *not* about the glory of an individual player. The focus is -- in the immortal words of Bo -- "The team, the team, the TEAM." Hoke gets this. His coaches get this. I'm quite certain Denard and his teammates get this. The media does not. And select posters on this site do not. But whatever ... the coaches and players do. Go Blue! Damn, it's nice to have something to believe in again.
DonAZ
Wed, Feb 23, 2011 : 10:32 p.m.
Dusty@ "Right, because we haven't had Heisman winners at Michigan. We're too much about "the team"!" That's an astonishingly dishonest reading of what I wrote. I recognize Michigan has had Heisman winners, and relatively recently. Saying that team outcome supercedes individual recognition does NOT in any way take away from the talent a player may possess. BUT -- and there's that sublety thing again, so on your toes -- when pursuit of individual recognition takes precedence over the success of the team then there will not likely be success for the team. That does NOT mean one can't recognize Robinson's talent; it means it does not take top priority. I'd be willing to bet a pile o cash that Robinson himself would agree with that. * * * The internet has spawned an army of people who seem incapable of seeing the trap that is the false choice dilemma.
Dusty
Wed, Feb 23, 2011 : 7:25 a.m.
Right, because we haven't had Heisman winners at Michigan. We're too much about "the team"! Talent is recognized, regardless of what Bo said 30 years ago.
tater
Wed, Feb 23, 2011 : 1:43 a.m.
It's obvious that Denard won't get the stats that he got last year, but the publicity he got may help him this year. Coming off as extremely charismatic while remaining genuinely humble can't hurt, either. The main question I see is whether or not Borges and Hoke can get Denard the kind of wide open receivers the spread routinely produces. It can happen, but it is going to require more imagination than we have ever seen from the Carr-tel. A lot of fakes, misdirection, and play-calling that doesn't fall into the old Carr-tel pattern would really help. So would a healthy V Smith and the the emergence of one of the bigger RB's on the team. And I really hope this part of the LC charts has been thrown out: 1st down: run. 2nd and short: run. 2nd and long: pass. 3rd and short: run 3rd and long: pass 3rd and very long: "let's run a draw and fool EVERYBODY."
DonAZ
Wed, Feb 23, 2011 : 4:24 a.m.
Tater: "The main question I see is whether or not Borges and Hoke can get Denard the kind of wide open receivers the spread routinely produces." I guess that's why Mississippi State had Denard's number all during the bowl game, huh? "The spread" is not magic. It relies on *multiple* threats coming out of the backfield along with receivers in the short field. Michigan last year had *one* threat out of the backfield -- Denard. And while I like Denard a lot, he's *not* the world's best QB when it comes to reads and fakes. He's simply *not* that quick. And that is why MSU (and Iowa, Wisconsin and OSU) was able to key off DR and stop Michigan's offense. I'm almost getting tired of typing the same thing time and time again. I *promise* you we'll see a more effective Michigan this fall, and it *won't* be because of RR's left-over talent. RR's play list: * 1st down: DR run * 2nd down: DR run * 3rd down: DR pass ... overthrown or dropped ball * 4th down: DR run ... no conversion, turn ball over.
chiro19
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 10:03 p.m.
Hopefully Denard evolves into a better passer on his secondary reads! If he has that ability, because he is still young, he will be very dangerous as a more conventional qb. If he puts in the amount of work this offseason as he did last he will make a fairly large step in the right direction. Go Blue!
BornInA2
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 8:26 p.m.
By "the bulk" do you mean the first five of the thirteen games they played? Upon reaching the non-creampuff part of the schedule, they started losing, Denard was playing hurt, and opposing teams figured out how to defend our one-trick offense. He had a good season, but let's not rewrite history.
Craig Lounsbury
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 7:38 p.m.
Nothing says George Washingtons Birthday like a piece of cherry pie and a Heisman watch. Here's a C&P of their schedule. Which game will dash his hopes? 2011 Michigan Football Schedule Date Opponent / Event Location Time / Result Sat., Sep. 3 vs. Western Michigan TV Ann Arbor, Mich. TBA Sat., Sep. 10 vs. Notre Dame TV Ann Arbor, Mich. 8:00 p.m. ET Sat., Sep. 17 vs. Eastern Michigan TV Ann Arbor, Mich. TBA Sat., Sep. 24 vs. San Diego State TV Ann Arbor, Mich. TBA Sat., Oct. 1 vs. Minnesota * TV Ann Arbor, Mich. TBA Sat., Oct. 8 at Northwestern * TV Evanston, Ill. TBA Sat., Oct. 15 at Michigan State * TV East Lansing, Mich. TBA Sat., Oct. 29 vs. Purdue (Homecoming) * TV Ann Arbor, Mich. TBA Sat., Nov. 5 at Iowa * TV Iowa City, Iowa TBA Sat., Nov. 12 at Illinois * TV Champaign, Ill. TBA Sat., Nov. 19 vs. Nebraska * TV Ann Arbor, Mich. TBA Sat., Nov. 26 vs. Ohio State * TV Ann Arbor, Mich. TBA
baitm
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 7:26 p.m.
Let's go blue!,,,,,,remember the team, the team, the team.
Ignatz
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 6:54 p.m.
Really? They're stating this already? Maybe his first born son will be named to the Pre-preseason Heisman watch list by IGotNothingBetterToDoThanShowPeopleHowSmartIThinkIAm.com