Super senior Sean Clifford
- Thread starter snaphook297
- Start date
Clifford wasn't the reason we lost. A prepared Allar might have done a little better as the starter since he's a more precise passer and probably able to complete throws in traffic better, but we had too many other trouble areas to say it would have made a big difference. Clifford made some positive plays a freshman probably wouldn't have, so it likely evened out. They physically whipped us in a way that only Michigan seems to manage.
I doubt that happens again this year, even in 2 weeks.
Looking ahead this season, I don't think it's as easy as just handing the reins over to Allar if we lose 2-3 games or some magic formula. There may be scenarios where that makes sense, but the impact on the team and how the move is perceived by them will have to be weighed.
Last edited:
He completed one pass for 120 yds? Impressive!
It was the o line. Those backs often went five yards or more before they were touched and often further. And they never had to make a cut for those five yards. Plus, they ran rignt through tackles.
Hard stop. He would have done worse. Clifford's mobility kept Michigan at bay as the threat of him running is there. Allar has a much better arm but lacks mobility. We don't have a receiver/s that can draw multiple defenders deep and haven't since Godwin left the program. If he would have been in, the dogs would have been unleashed.
Our D Line depth was exposed. Against that kind of run heavy offense, as good as they are, we couldn’t allow our defense to be on the field for 80-90 snaps.
we were exposed because our offense couldn’t sustain a drive.
But Mich drove down the field on them right from the start. Controlled the entire first quarter
Our LBs did a poor job tackling yesterday. We have guys going for the big hit rather than simply making sure the runner is taken down.
And when they weren’t going for the big hit, they were more concerned about the ball than getting them on the ground. This allowed the RBs to get 2,3,4 extra yards even when we were there to make the play. What might have been 2nd and 7 became 2nd and 3 while we were grabbing for the ball.
In all of football there has been a huge emphasis on forcing turnovers. So much so that ‘tacklers’ are more concerned with going after the ball instead of making a tackle. Coaches emphasize it, players love the attention, fans and media go bonkers on turnovers. But it has hurt the game because, as you say, the ball carriers get more yardage....sometimes large gains or even TDs.
Having D-Linemen that are not capable of occupying O-Linemen and allowing those guys to make it to the next level and get on your linebackers and your linebackers are slow to react and get lost in the pile, it is always a recipe for disaster. When you accompany that with D-Linemen that can't get off blocks, poor tackling, filling the wrong gaps your doomed. When an offensive line can block a defensive line head up and no one requires double teams or at the least scraping , you have no advantage.
What baffles me is Franklin saying we have to get bigger and guys thinking they are Donald and they aren't. I mean he recruits and that's his job to fill those positions with the players to do the job. It's like he had some magic moment and just realized that.
Offensively I was like where are the tight ends at. Some games they are used all the time and others they seem to just disappear. There was no plan yesterday to get Michigan out of any rhythm and there were no adjustments. I'm not sore about the loss, it's how it happened.
What baffles me is Franklin saying we have to get bigger and guys thinking they are Donald and they aren't. I mean he recruits and that's his job to fill those positions with the players to do the job. It's like he had some magic moment and just realized that.
Offensively I was like where are the tight ends at. Some games they are used all the time and others they seem to just disappear. There was no plan yesterday to get Michigan out of any rhythm and there were no adjustments. I'm not sore about the loss, it's how it happened.
Last edited:
McCarthy played well but I’m not ready to say he’s amazing. His OL, RBs, and coaches put him in a great position to succeed and succeed he did. McCarthy did a great job scrambling and throwing a pretty accurate ball when called upon, but UM could have won that game with a lot of us playing QB
Time for Clifford to step back, whether by injury or lack of production in big games. He has every opportunity to audible to a better play on every down and it produced nothing yesterday. Yes his line sucked again for another year but his continued happy feet and overthrows or lack of touch should be in the rearview mirror. His teammates care more about winning than whether Franklin is staying loyal to his 6th year QB.
McCarthy said post game that (the vaunted Clifford-led O) had one first down in the 1st half to Michigan's 18. Whether it was one, two...whatever...it was embarrassing. Would Allar have done better with Yurcich game planning to his strengths? We'll never know, but this was the third lackluster-to-bad game in a row for our 6th year been-around-forever QB. What makes you think he'll be much better vs Minny?
No one "loves" Clifford. I'm mad he came back this season. We're just realistic about where things are.
Yep, I agree it's not all on Clifford. And I respect Franklin supporting Clifford and starting him. But yes Clifford was part of the problem. Even on his long run he was running a 5.4 40, i.e. he is not now healthy. Add to the list Wallace. Add Elsdon. That's a start. Those are 3 changes that need to be made. Joe surely would have made them. I doubt Franklin will make any of them.
I've been an ardent supporter of Franklin, but his boss needs to have a serious talk with him and demand changes. Yesterday's game was an embarrassment that should not happen to a coach in his 9th year that just got a 10 year mega $ extension.
Last edited:
It was simple vision. Read the LB. LB past you, cutback. Behind you off tackle. That is the design of the play all the way down to HS. Execution is a better word.
Yep, I agree it's not all on Clifford. And I respect Franklin supporting Clifford and starting him. But yes Clifford was part of the problem. Even on his long run he was running a 5.4 40, i.e. he is not now healthy. Add to the list Wallace. Add Elsdon. That's a start. Those are 3 changes that need to be made. Joe surely would have made them. I doubt Franklin will make any of them.
True. It shouldn’t happen. But poor performance on the field isn’t a fireable for cause offense. There’s little accountability as long as the buyout is as high as it is.
Were you realistic about where things were before Ohio State in 2016?
Why are you focused on a fluke? What odds would you give of a repeat of the "Block Six" game?
I don't have a love for Clifford. I just think it is stupid to put a quarterback on the field that lack mobility given the state of the line and the fact that we don't have receivers that can challenge the deep third of the field. Clifford's legs were the difference between a really bad start and something much worse. We all saw what Franklin did to Hackenberg. Yesterday, the line very much looked like it did in 14 and 15 when he forced linemen built for man blocking to play in a system they physically couldn't execute. It looked worse than last year at Iowa which was really bad, and that was before Clifford got hurt. The big difference, Hack had legitimate deep threats at receiver and a defense far better than ours. It didn't change the fact that Franklin destroyed his career before it started but Allar will get killed if he is put in against a Big Ten defense. They will send 6, 7 or 8 on every play and he'll get hit 20 times a game. Clifford's legs prevent that type of carnage at the expense of the passing game. Just being realistic. I don't think a switch benefits anyone except Minnesota, Rutgers, Maryland and Michigan State.
Lacks mobility? Clifford is about as quick as a Galapogas Turtle in the backfield. His pocket awareness is laughable.
Do you know how many bad plays his 'pocket awareness' and legs have got us out of this year? A lot. The fact of the matter is, he faces a lot less pressure than Allar would because teams have to respect his run.
He had more rushing yards than the rest of our team combined
But, no, he's not "dangerous" but he's mobile. Allar is a pure pocket passer (something I'm thrilled we have) and can't wait to see him get about 10 starts before he has to play Ohio State or Michigan
I am of the opinion that Veilleux needs to split reps with Allar after this 3 game gauntlet. Villeux is mobile and experienced. This allows Allar to be brought along slower and you can limit the playbook for him.
Last edited:
Computing the average punt distance is pretty complicated. Might need @LionJim to help out.
