Rumormongering: Burke Departure, Gardner WR Prospects Comment Count

Brian

A couple of good sources have passed along information about Michigan's hot topics du jour.

Trey-Burke-Michigan[1]rn_i_devingardner_ms_300[1]

On Trey Burke. This should not be a scenario like Harris or Morris where the player leaves for dim draft prospects. In Harris's case he wanted out no matter what; Morris had people in his inner circle pushing him into the draft.

Burke is not either of those guys. If the NBA does not tell him he is a first round lock, he'll be back. Since that doesn't seem in the cards—name the last one-and-done under six feet tall—Michigan should avoid the terrifying prospect of entering next year with no point guard at all.

On Devin Gardner. Someone who's seen Gardner at all of Michigan's practices so far says he's "instantly Michigan's best receiver and adds a new dimension to the offense." He's "crazy athletic" with "surprisingly great hands." The one complication for Gardner-to-WR is the situation at quarterback, where he's still the clear #2 option. Gardner is still taking all the second team QB reps.

/end inside info, begin speculation

A lot of people have been mentioning Woodson when talking about this when trying to guess how much playing time is reasonable for a guy who's still full time at a second position. He got 10-15 snaps a game on offense back in '97. Gardner may start at that level, but if it's crunch time and he's 6'5" with a city block catching radius…

Comments

Ali G Bomaye

March 23rd, 2012 at 12:30 PM ^

It's all well and good to use him as a WR in limited packages (like Woodson in '97), but not if it costs him any practice time at QB.  A good QB is infinitely more valuable than a good WR, and as LSU's Russell Shepard has shown, there's no guarantee that even a freakishly athletic QB will make a decent WR.

wolverine1987

March 23rd, 2012 at 12:32 PM ^

If that insider's word is true, we need him far more at WR than at backup QB. Let's be honest, if Denard goes out for the year at some point we're in huge trouble anyway, and there is really no evidence at all that DG can play at Denard's level--if by some miracle they both get injured then bring on Bellamy.

jmblue

March 23rd, 2012 at 12:35 PM ^

I don't think the Woodson comparison is a good one.  Woodson couldn't play more than 10-15 snaps on offense because he was playing 70 on defense at the same time.  In Gardner's case, he'll presumably either be playing WR or sitting on the sidelines. 

Space Coyote

March 23rd, 2012 at 12:57 PM ^

Not to mention that he also already knows the playbook and can practice at the position when not getting reps himself (unlike being on the other side of the ball).  I don't think he will be out there every down, but if he is instantly the best WR already, I would expect ~15-25 plays a game as a WR, probably closer to the 15 for the same reason you don't just run Denard 25 times a game.

Starko

March 23rd, 2012 at 3:58 PM ^

This seems pretty obvious to me.  It doesn't take an ironman to play 10-15 snaps on offense and spend the rest of the game sending in signals from the sidelines.  I'm not even sure what people are thinking here.  Practice will be too hard?  The games certainly won't be.   IMO he should be full time WR in games unless Denard gets hurt.

biakabutuka ex…

March 23rd, 2012 at 12:40 PM ^

Any coaches here? Why can't you just practice 2 or 3 routes all week with Gardner (different each week) and put him in if the play is called or it's a running play? Really, how much would that limit his production at WR?

biakabutuka ex…

March 23rd, 2012 at 2:12 PM ^

 

Would you mind backing up this statement? Do you think I meant he'd be on the field all game?
 
I do know a little arithmetic, and if you practice N routes, and half of the time you're on the field it's a running play, you're good for (N x 2) plays at least before you've exhausted your usefulness on the field. And that's just the most conservative number possible. So please explain how a DC will have a field day against plays he hasn't seen yet, or has only seen a couple times?
 
That's also assuming the other team can stop our 6'5" super athletic receiver from doing what he wants. If they can't, it doesn't matter what they see coming; worst case scenario, you suck in a double team for your teammates.

98

March 23rd, 2012 at 1:57 PM ^

Devin is much more likely to get injured playing WR than he is be the backup for obvious reasons as being on the field. But also Deving twist an ankle or something coming down with a ball or take a hard shot going over the middle. It's not out of the realm of possibility that both Devin and Denard are injured at the same point this year. God forbid that happens but it's not impossible. I'd like to make sure that Bellomy can at least be a decent QB who can move the ball before I instantly slide Devin over. You don't want to get burned where both of them are out and bellomy looks completely lost out there

FrankMurphy

March 23rd, 2012 at 12:41 PM ^

The one complication for Gardner-to-WR is the situation at quarterback, where he's still the clear #2 option. Gardner is still taking all the second team QB reps.

From Gardner's perspective, that sounds like one of them good problems.

sheepdog

March 23rd, 2012 at 12:43 PM ^

considering we have a guy named Roy Roundtree on our team, that is a hell of an assertion to call him the best receiver out there.    That could be a game changer if true.

FreddieMercuryHayes

March 23rd, 2012 at 12:57 PM ^

I think it says we have a bunch of great slot receivers, but they don't fit in as well with the different passing game our current OC runs. If RR were still here, the receiving core would be fine. But it also might say our current staff miscalculated a bit on what type of receiver we had when they were trying to fill out the '11 class.

FrankMurphy

March 23rd, 2012 at 1:14 PM ^

Yeah, but it's not a stretch given that Gardner is 6'5" and Roundtree is 6'0". If Gardner really does have the athleticism, speed, and hands to play receiver at this level, then it's intoxicating to think about what those extra five inches add to our receiving corps.

EDIT: This is supposed to be in reply to bama blue's post above. Not sure why it keeps putting my post in the wrong place.

WolvinLA2

March 23rd, 2012 at 2:12 PM ^

Look at our receivers last year.  We had one guy who made some awesome catches and had some great runs after the catch, but he's gone.  The guys we have returning didn't do a whole lot last year.  Roundtree has had success in the past and Gallon is good for what he does.  But we knew this would be a thin year at WR, so it shouldn't be a major surprise.  We already knew we didn't have anyone dynamic at that spot.

Bluegoose

March 23rd, 2012 at 12:45 PM ^

The word is that Bellomy throws the most "catchable ball" of the three. I for one would like to see a bit of him along the way. We've seen DG at QB, and it seems reviews are mixed is a fair critique for him at QB, at least so far.

I like the sounds of an athletic and fast 6'5" wideout with great hands.

Icehole Woody

March 23rd, 2012 at 1:00 PM ^

"instantly Michigan's best receiver and adds a new dimension to the offense."

That is saying a lot.  I'm not sure how I feel about this.  Sad or worried about not seeing him at QB and excited to see him catch balls.  I bet his YAC will be outstanding.

BursleysFinest

March 23rd, 2012 at 1:01 PM ^

I love Gardner at Receiver right now, but he will be the best non-Denard option at QB during this time, and I think that's the coach's plan too.

Shane will be a Great QB, but expecting him to come in and perform better than an experienced Gardner, who was just as highly rated at QB, is not realistic. Not to mention that at that time, we'll have Jehu and Amara, Senior Gallon, Jerald Robinson and the elite receiver recruits we seem on track to get this year, so we won't need Devin at WR  as much

Lac55

March 23rd, 2012 at 1:02 PM ^

I'm sorry but the cons don't outweigh the pros when it comes to the DG at wr position so you have to roll with it. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see DG get significant snaps at qb since he was recruited as the #1 dual threat in the nation the year he came out. The thing is if he's riding the bench behind Denard, why not get one of your best athletes on the field?

M - Flightsci

March 23rd, 2012 at 1:07 PM ^

 "surprisingly great hands."

 

I wonder how this is so surprising, based on the fact that he's a player who is constantly handling the football and is 6'5" and would consequently probably have enormous hands.

mgowill

March 23rd, 2012 at 1:18 PM ^

I think the way the new rule works for declaring to go to the NBA is pretty wonky.

If I understand correctly, you have to tell your NCAA coach on April 10th if you plan to come back.  If you do so, you aren't allowed to work out with any NBA teams after that and on the 29th (?) you can say "to hell with you" to the NCAA and then go ahead and go pro anyways.  However, if you declare on the 10th that you are going pro, you don't get the option to rescind.

I sure hope that Burke gets the best advice possible.  Whether that be coming back or going pro.

MI Expat NY

March 23rd, 2012 at 2:48 PM ^

It pretty much did away with the ability of college players to test the waters.  The rule change is completely for the benefit of college coaches.  They'd rather eliminate uncertainty as to their roster than care about the potential benefits their players would receive by going through the pre-draft process.

Louie C

March 23rd, 2012 at 1:27 PM ^

DG at WR? Saying that he is the best option at wideout is a little troubling, but I might like that. 5'9-6'0 185 CB's going up against him? Sounds like Megatron 2.0. As far as Burke is concerned, I still ain't steppin' away from the ledge yet.

Skiptoomylou22

March 23rd, 2012 at 1:39 PM ^

Just for analogy sake, Pryor would of been a damn good receiver as well im sure, maybe even better than Posey. It's not troubling simply because it means DG is really good, not that Roy and Jeremy are underperforming. At the college level, athletes are athletes, if they can ball you let them.

tylers48

March 23rd, 2012 at 1:27 PM ^

Am I the only one who is extremely excited about Amara Darboh? Seems like people are forgetting about him when talking about WR recruiting or lack thereof. 

WolvinLA2

March 23rd, 2012 at 1:33 PM ^

If those assertions are true about DG, absolutely play him at WR.  Sure, give him the second team QB reps, give Bellomy a bunch of QB reps too, and only readjust your plan if Denard has a multi-game injury. 

Having a guy who is that tall, and can run, jump and catch is rare.  Take advantage of it.  And push like hell for that injury redshirt.

Also - all this talk of DG at WR has him at 6'5", but I had never seen him listed above 6'4" before this, and the M roster still lists him at 6'4".  Is there something new saying he's 6'5", or does listing him an inch taller help us rationalize his switch?

One Inch Woody…

March 23rd, 2012 at 2:06 PM ^

Seeing Gardner in person two years ago, I can honestly say that he actually looked to be 6' 6" to me the first time I saw him. He was with Denard (at the Blue Apple, coincidentally, buying up the entire store with their leftover blue bucks; cool story bro) and he was at least 4/5 inches taller than Denard. And Denard is pretty damn close to 6 foot himself.

That being said, I think Gardner NEEDS to be at WR for the spring and perhaps the fall. As someone above said: give him 15-20 plays a game. Just that by itself changes the whole complexion of the offense. It gives Gallon, Robinson, Tree, and others opportunities.. it gives Gardner opportunities himself! The injury concerns are there, but let's not make a Zook Punt decision (i.e. go for the most conservative option, ignoring the fact that the benefits immensely outweigh the risks). It would be good for the team, good for Devin, good for Denard, good for Bellomy, good for EVERYONE.