Interesting that they think the strongest area of the offense is WR.
a vitally important recap of all the dumb tweets sent during the Harbaugh coaching search
Interesting that they think the strongest area of the offense is WR.
I like that they've got Van Bergen in place for a strong year; seems like they're as cautiously optimistic as we all are, and aside from a few weird things (like the receiving corps being stronger than our senior backs) have managed to couch in digestible form all the relevant information: O-line will be stronger, new formations and wacky unpredictability on D, etc.
breakdown of the situation. I like how they gave RR the best grade possible. They realize that he's got a nasty offense that is just waiting to unleash on the Big Ten. The one number that jumps off the page to me was the 30 turnovers last year. If we can cut that in half, it will go a long way in helping every phase of the game. We beat ourselves several times last year, and knowing the offense will help this problem. Two months and a few days away.... Go Blue!!!
....turnovers directly caused Michigan to lose the Notre Dame, Toledo and Purdue games. Cutting down the turnovers alone would have led to a 6-6 record last year. I'm excited for this season.
They have a little more faith in us than the magazines. Athlon has us at 55th in the country and TSN has us even lower, 8th or 9th in the Big Ten.
Brandon Minor isn't a returning starter? What about Kroger? I know he didn't start as the starter but I was fairly certain he was listed as the starter at the end of the season wasn't he? And I'm pretty sure Odoms is a returning starter at PR.
I'd give the Offense a C+ or a B- - I think they may have undervalued the O-Line just a little bit (the difference between C and C+/B-).
Is it August yet?!?!?!
......I like shopping at Kroger.
Martell Webb outplayed Kevin Koger in the Spring. It looks as though we have two TEs with alot of upside. My question is, will Rich Rod and Calvin Magee be able to incorporate them in the offense? I hope so.
at Oklahoma this year with the specific idea of looking to incorporate TEs into the spread.
Think Jermaine Gresham last year with those long TD's against Okie State and Texas Tech.
Those TE's will get their chance this year.
I'm aware of that. I'm curious to see if any of those formations that they took from Oklahoma's offense actually make it onto the field for us this year.
I think returning starters is based on the first game. McGuffie started over Minor. Also Butler started over Koger.
Does that 213 refer to area code? Because I live in the 213!
Only "C" for the offense? I expect much better than that. We probably have the best all-around set of returning skill players in the Big 10. At WR we've got Matthews, Odoms, Stonum, Hemmingway, and Roundtree. The wide receivers were underrated last year and with a competent QB Matthews and Odoms would have had big seasons. The entire offensive line returns and that extra year of experience is hugely valuable. They started to show significant progress in the second half of last year. The only glaring weakness is inexperience at QB.
If our defense is good enough to warrant a B-, I'll be delighted. If the spring game is any indication, Stevie Brown still can't tackle in the open field.
Freshman quarterbacks can't lead teams. Remember?
Never mind about that Henne guy.
Really? Are people still making the Henne comparisons? World of difference in support cast between Henne and Forcier. True freshman success is very rare. The only dual threat QB of recent to have a solid freshman year is Robert Griffin of Baylor.
On the offensive side of the ball, one could argue that Forcier has more help than Henne did with every O lineman back, a senior RB and a senior WR back as well. If you want to argue about how good those positions coming back are then you might have a better argument, but every position other than Forcier is back. Experience-wise, he couldn't be put in a better situation.
Henne had 3 All-Big-10 selections returning on the line (Baas, Lentz, Stenavich), and two all-big ten WR's returning.
are undervaluing the fact the Forcier's name starts with an "F." He will follow in the footsteps of fellow Fmen like Favre, Flutie, Fouts, Frerrote, and (most recently) Joe Flacco. While this does not guarantee a great freshman year, it does put him in a better starting position than Henne who had only the likes of Hostetler, Hasselbeck, and Harrington to follow.
Yes, if you remove every single shred of context from the two situations, Tate's current situation is identical to Henne's in 2004.
Mr. Leach was pretty good starting as a Freshie.
...if you're referring to David Cone's "Juke" of Brown. Brown couldn't tackle him because of the QB restrictions. Try playing at full speed and then having to stop because you can't tackle a guy. It isn't a natural play. Cone would have eaten turf in a live situation.
Brian may as well add on "site ethics":
"If something goes badly on defense, and Stevie Brown is in the camera shot, he shoulders all blame."
I for one hopes he is all Big Ten this year, because I'm a Michigan fan and I want the "best athlete and player in practice" to be the best Michigan defender.
It also would mean that he's defending the slot and the run well for us.
But yeah, once Brown is gone, who assumes the throne? Ezeh?
Hey, IME (which is admittedly not worth much), Brown and Harrison shouldered a lot of the blame that should have bee going the way of Ezeh for all of last year.
any analysis of Michigan Football that's not on MGoBlog is just weak.
The o-line is the biggest problem on offense? What about QB? The o-line should be one of the strengths on the team.
IMO, Greg Mathews will be the punt returner not Odoms
one of the faster quicker freshmen should take that spot over if they can hold onto the ball. Mathews just does not have the quickness to be a good returner.
I honestly would have liked Cissoko quite a bit as a returner -- if it weren't for the damn fumbles. He has excellent speed, and would find a crease and hit it hard.
I'd really like to see Stokes get a chance returning kickoffs and punts. He's supposed to be pretty dynamic with good speed. I think he's going to be the "sleeper" pick to have a huge impact.
I think we are not going to have a returner this year. We are going to try and block every punt and not leave anyone back. This way we are guaranteed not to fumble any punts.
I think it will be Odoms. Assuming that his ball security issues have been taken care of.
Yeah Greg Mathews is just less of a liability but I do agree that if Odoms, Cissoko, T-Rob etc. learn how to catch the ball then they should be back there.
, V. Smith, J. Gallon, etc etc etc
"And don't be shocked if Robinson unleashes myriad stunts and blitzes that haven't been seen in these parts … ever"
"Van Bergen is an underrated athlete who plays like his hair is on fire."
I know its a cliche but all the quotes about Robinson's defensive scheme says blitzes and pressure. With the two hybrid positions that should give Robinson a lot of different looks and chances to create pressure and confusion.
Just wondering if Robinson's defense turns out to be a surprise (in a good way) and it is one of the top in the Big 10, does anyone think some big names like Gholston might think twice about their commits or do you think we already have our guys in Paskorz, Kinard and Wilkins?
If we play well and our defense is high caliber this year, with iffy depth, and Gholston de-commits, I think we'll find a place for the kid
to decommit. I would think that it may help us with Luc, Floyd, and that DT from Utah oops I mean Heimuli.
I didn't mean that Gholston would decommit, I used him as an example. I just meant that if the D comes around and plays well this year, we might see some interest from higher profile DE/LB that wrote UM off because of the way the defense played last year under Shafer. Just a lot of unknowns next year and a solid 3/4 might make an impression on some kids who are on the line about UM.
a 3-4. Not going 3-9 will be the biggest help in recruiting. Despite that record it looks like we will get official visits from the top rated player overall, MLB, and WR. If Lattimore still decides to make his visit that would be #1 or 2 RB. All in all not bad after the worst season in Michigan football history.
One of the things that has frustrated me for about thirty years of UM football is watching DE's and LB's get into the backfield, only to just miss catching the QB while he makes a crucial play. Hopefully, the new emphasis on speed and hybrid positions will keep this from happening this year.
I've got a really early case of football fever this year. I'm counting down the hours to kickoff already and it's not even July. Usually I don't get this way until the middle of August. I'm really eager to see how this team looks in the first game.
I had a very vivid dream a few weeks ago that it was the day before the M-OSU game this season, and the entire campus and M football community was in a state of near-delirious hysteria and anticipation of the game, in a good way. There was nothing specific in the dream about the won-loss records going into the game, just the strong feeling that it was going to be fantastic when we beat OSU.
The fact that I dreamed about that instead of Salma Hayek is pathetic.
I'm curious what they were looking at to come to the conclusion that his athleticism is "underrated," and that he plays like his hair is on fire. 13 tackles in 12 games is no big deal, and if it's because he just didn't play very many minutes, then I'd ask what the glowing assessment is based on. We've had so many just-barely-average DLs over the years that I'm very skeptical on any guy until he's really proved in game action that he's a difference-maker. The one thing in Gerg's resume that excites me the most is his past experience as a DL coach at UCLA.
I like the "Hair on Fire" description better when Phil Steele was using it a few years ago to describe RR's offense at WVU.
46 is better than 47
I'm sick of people saying our QBs didn't fit RR's scheme last year. Whose scheme did they fit? Is there a league or coach/team looking for QBs who cannot THROW the ball? I think whether you're playing spread option or not, being able to hit an open receiver is valued most places that football is played, and our guys failed time and again.
Also, how come nobody mentions Hemingway? I thought he showed great promise 2 yrs ago (and in the Cap 1 Bowl) and has a cool name befitting a Michigan WR. I expect him to be 2nd or 3rd on the depth chart.
with the "noone mentions.....(insert name.)"
He's a second teamer right now. If he plays better, he "will be mentioned."
I've got a cure for your pet peeve. Go and watch last year's spring game. Then watch a couple of games from last year, noting how both Threet & Sheridan look in the pocket. Pay attention to the reads they make, who they decide to throw to, and their body language as they play. Now watch this year's spring game. Notice how Cone (large pro-style QB) looks a lot like Nick & Steven did last year: tall, awkward, rangy, un-athletic, and slow are good adjectives here. Both Tate & Jack Kennedy run the offense in a much smoother, faster pace. I mention Jack because even though his skills aren't what Tate's are by a long stretch, he still looks comfortable excecuting what RR wants him to (because of his natural athletic build and ability).
This offense is built on having a QB that can run around, fake option, option, dodge, weave, and make plays on the run. Having a 6'5" 255lb QB just looks like a fish out of water in this offense. Don't just take my word for it, go and watch the film. The eye in the sky don't lie. You are correct that accuracy is important for any QB in any system, but fitting a spread scheme is hard for a big pro-style lug.
yeah, you've got a good point there. Still, I think having a qb who could hit the broad side of a barn from 10-30 yards away, even if he's a lumbering dinosaur, would have made a huge difference last year. Style (comfort in a spread) and accuracy are both important...it's just irritating that the whole accuracy thing, which is pretty important, rarely gets mentioned (as it didn't in this article).