Seasoning the Line: 2015
While I was chatting with Brian last week he happened to pull up the top 7 composite recruits from the 2013 season. I followed and…
Woof. Green has obvious vision problems and hasn't emerged from a pile of guys among whom the most statistically effective last year was Drake Johnson. Dymonte Thomas and Shane Morris are already juniors and to date still seem to be at least a year's worth of good coaching away from ready.
That leaves us the offensive line class. Kugler seems to be on track to start when Glasgow surrenders his job—I've heard the same suite of nice things you have. Bosch transferred after performing about how you'd expect a true freshman thrust into a Borges-coached OL would. Fox hasn't been mentioned since a staff ago. Dawson we have only a little more data, much of that getting owned by Maurice Hurst in the spring game (if Hurst does that against Utah's OL I'll happily rescind that as a criticism).
On the other hand we caution all the time about giving up on OL when they're too young.
So when do you know about an offensive lineman?
This is a question I've been interested in a long time, going back to an article one of my Daily colleagues did on OL recruiting to highlight the injuries plaguing the classes Michigan took while I was there. I could never find the article but in January 2013 I tried to recreate some of that information, plus a 12-year update. I did a thing about a year ago on growth tracks to reset expectations for those 2012 and 2013 line classes. Let's check in again, this time with columns.
The towers shrink because players currently on the roster are included in the data, and obviously our information on them is incomplete. "Not available" is a catch-all for transfers, dismissals, guys playing defense, injuries and medicals and whatnot. "Excellent" is basically all-conference-ish, "Solid" is that, "Liability" are guys who were starting but the fan consensus was they shouldn't be or wouldn't but for things like the 2008 depth chart or gross Borges incompetence.
This time I differentiated between "backups" and "two-deep" (an imperfect thing from memory and pouring through old Wolverine annuals). The former are guys buried on the depth chart and unlikely to play; the latter are only the top backups we are relatively certain would have played if they weren't behind an established starter. It's not about being technically on the two-deep, more like the first one or two guys in if an OL goes down—Erik Magnusson last year, or Leo Henige forever.
Things:
- Redshirting is overwhelmingly the normal thing to do as a freshman.
- Only a handful of players are capable of starting (shades of yellow) as redshirt freshmen. If you take the yellow chunk from there and size it against the 4th and 5th years you can see only about a third of the eventually useful players are demonstrably so at that age. Sing the praises of any 2014s already playing; don't give up on any who are not.
- By RS Soph there is a big yellow expansion. The mysterious "backups" region has shrunk considerably. You have a fairly good sense of who these guys are by the end of this year.
- There is very little difference—just a slight improvement—between RS Juniors and 5th year seniors. The backups disappear into unrenewed 5ths.
If you're using this imperfect data set of 82 players, many of whom didn't complete their careers for non-ability-related reasons, to get a feel for when to judge an offensive linemen, you could say it's a half-life. Don't judge a (redshirt) freshman unless he's already playing well, but after their third year in the program if he's not on the two-deep the chances of ever doing so decrease exponentially.
What this means for the 2012-'14 OL classes
Be excited for: Mason Cole.
Be extremely content with: Mags, Kalis and Braden if they seem to be playing well this year.
Keep an eye out for: Kugler, Logan Tuley-Tillman, and David Dawson. These are 2013 guys mentioned as probable two-deep contributors, though our current scouting has Kugler pretty much ready to play, LTT half-way there, and Dawson probably not ready yet. Further data received on them this year will speak volumes about their futures.
Be patient with: Juwann Bushell-Beatty. If he pops up this year he's probably going to be awesome; if he's buried there's plenty of time that this doesn't matter.
Getting late: Bars, Fox, Samuelson. With Bars at least we've heard past mentions of him competing, though he was always kind of the last guy in that 2012 class. He may be on the Huyge track; if he's not on the two-deep this (his redshirt junior) year it doesn't seem very likely he'll be a starter in 2016. Fox has been hurt so much in his career (just going off of game reports) if he's not medicaled he probably deserves some extra time to get caught up. Samuelson I've heard nothing about; even when I ask people with insider-y info I get nothing.
It would be nice to see him take the reins at Center - pushing Glasgow out to guard, or even right tackle.
Great analysis - but what is your projected depth chart? Do you have a two-deep ready?!?!?
/s (Kinda)
Could I BE moar excited about the Offensive Line?!?!?!?!?
Something that could complicate this - coaching changes and position switches. Do you have any data about how the switch to Zone blocking affected those in 2005/06? Or if people were able to move "up" the chart by switching to Guard/Tackle/Etc? If Mason Cole is an OK LT as a true freshman, where's his ceiling at Guard if he's moving there?
Good stuff.
That's my hope for him, a Stevie Brown type role.
When Harbaugh and Durkin were hired, Dymonte was the first player that came to mind on who could be the breakout/the player who benefits the most this year. Kid was rushed into action his freshman season because of how athletic he was, depth issue, and he was an EE. With Greg Jackson/Zordich and Durkin all taking this kid under their wing, I think he is going to make the plays that were expected of him when he enrolled here. Dymonte already has the athleticism, and now he has the coaching, I think he pulls it all together now!
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
It feels weird to be excited about the OL going into this year. Hell, it was the strength of the 2014 offense.
Like Boliver, I would like to see Kugler push for PT and kick Glasgow out to guard or tackle. My only question is, what is the center depth beyond that? On the DCBC page Runyan is listed there but is that just because he is projected to be an interior guy or is center his likely position?
is Kugler and Glasgow. If Kugler starts at center and Glasgow starts somewhere else on the line, should Kugler get hurt, they'd more than likely move Glasgow to center and bring in someone else to replace Glasgow's position.
I said this in another thread, but it's hard not to be frustrated by the lack of results by the 2012 and 2013 recruiting classes which were highly ranked. Guys on this list as well as others like Richardson, RJS, Pipkins, Ojemudia, McCray, Charlton, Morris, Dukes, and Poggi, all of which were pretty highly ranked and have yet to do much. I'm really hopeful this coaching staff can get these guys going.
should hopefully start to pay dividends this year. They're either redshirt sophs or juniors. I agree it'd be nice to have had some more of these guys step up but they still have half their careers to make an impact.
I think that's a little more valid of a point regarding offensive lineman, but some of these guys play positions that are often able to contribute immediately like DB or RB. Guys ranked where Derrick Green, Dymonte Thomas, Mike McCray, and Taco Charlton are should be capable of contributing more than they have so far IMO. For example, Thomas Tyner at Oregon was #6 on ESPN's recruiting services, one spot behind Green, and he rushed for over 1,000 yards each of the past 2 seasons. Randy Gregory was ranked two places behind Taco Charlton on ESPNs DEs and we all know what he has done so far. These are just a few examples with a quick search. Maybe this doesn't pan out if you look at every guy, I don't know, but I do think the production doesn't seem to match up with their recruiting rankings so far.
I realize recruiting rankings aren't the end all be all, but I think the biggest issue was the previous coaching staff. To me what happens over the next couple years will be interesting. If Harbaugh and Co. are able to turn some of these guys into extremely solid contributors, I think we'll have an answer as to why the 2013 class maybe hasn't done as much at this point in their careers as some of us had hoped.
You mention both DB and RB are places where guys can contribute immediately. Well, Lewis is coming off a darn good sophomore campaign. Both Smith and Green have seen a lot of action, and while I'm not that high on either of them, I'm guessing there aren't too many running backs that would have run for 1000 yds behind UM's oline the last couple of years. Tyner walked into a juggernaut of an offense. I'm not saying Green's production matches Tyner's but if Green is at Oregon playing behind their oline and with Marriota, I'm guessing he has a lot better numbers then what he's put up at UM.
McCray was in a tough position. LB has been one of the better and deeper positions on the UM roster for a couple of years. Heck, Gideon actually looked real promising at the end of 2013 and then all but disappeard in 2014.
Take a guy like Alex Collins at Arkansas, again ranked lower than Green, and played on a 6-6 team with a similar record to UM. Collins rushed for 1,100 yards last year and 5.4 per carry. Ezekial Elliot was ranked behind Green. I'm not saying the classes were completely devoid of production. Lewis was probalby one of the few bight spots. Butt has shown a lot, Funchess was pretty danged good. Ross, Bolden, and Wilson have been solid but not great. UM did take a ton of LBs and spread teams may have taken snaps away from some guys. But, overall these classes have not lived up to their billing. If you consider they are juniors and seniors and this season and they were the #6 and #7 recruiting classes (according to ESPN), then they should be a top 10 team this year. I don't think anyone sees them as a top 10 team. I think we are all hoping the new staff can get more production from them, but it remains to be seen.
I think the new staff is key. Obviously, recruiting rankings don't always translate to the field on Saturday's but when you're talking almost entire classes not translating, to me that is probably more of indictment on the coaching staff then the kids. I'm not expecting miracles in the first year but the cupboard that Harbaugh found at UM is stocked much better then the cupboard he found at Stanford.
Dukes was a middling 3-star with offers from MAC schools and MACesque Illinois. But he was pretty tall! - so people got excited.
Tall was good when we were playing basketball on grass.
That was Rich Rod though, Hoke was going to run the all-fade offense, featuring Kid N Play as a "dual-threat" QB and Kenny Sky Walker at WR.
ESPN had him as a 4-star and top 300 guy. I know not everyone is high on ESPN rankings, which I'm not commenting on. But, nonetheless, that was the service I was looking at.
Fair enough, but that was a kid who didn't have the offers (or even close) to warrant being labeled a 4-star. I think he got a bump after Michigan commitment IIRC.
What killed some of these guys was the staff threw them out there early and wasted redshirts. I think we'd be more optimistic about guys like Stone, Charlton, Pipkins (before the left), Morris, etc. if they had 2-3 more years to go rather than 1-2. There were some misses (Dukes came from the "I can teach speed" camp of recruiting, Ojemudia had a great motor but just doesn't have the athleticism to be more than an average DE, Poggi for whatever reason just hasn't impressed much yet), but this feels like bad roster management as much as guys just bombing out.
What has Stone shown you in 3 years to make you yearn for 1 more? Or that 1 more will make him pop? Same for Pipkins? Mone showed more as a FR then Pipkins did as either a FR or his first 5 games as a SO. He came back last year and effectively was 3rd (or 4th) on a depth chart.
Some guys just dont make it.
Morris I will put in another category because true development can make all the diff at that position but a position like DT we had Hoke and Mattison coaching so to say Pipkins didnt develop because of bad coaching is not accurate. Same for Stone - the same guys who developed Bolden and JMFR and to a degree Ross were not idiots who could do nothing with Stone. He just hasnt done anything.
Other guys like Charlton I do agree it would have been nice to RS but he actually did play some as a FR and the lack of other players developing is why you have to do early playing time for guys who arent truly ready.
To me, Stone had the most potential of those hybrid DEs/LBs to play like Jake Ryan did as a sophomore. I'm not saying he'd have been a star like Ryan, but I also think that they wasted his redshirt year with a couple of kick returns and mop-up duty. Sometimes the lightbulb goes on for a guy with a different coaching staff, and having another year of him along with Charlton would make me feel a bit better about the recruiting gap behind them.
Pipkins was never going to live up to his 5* ranking, and maybe the injuries proved too much, but it was still a waste to burn a redshirt on a couple of downs against Alabama. Maybe not the strongest argument, but still a guy who needed more time on the bench and didn't get it.
I guess "bad coaching" isn't fair, but show me someone on the defensive line who truly emerged under Hoke and co. We talk up these guys and, yes, a couple of players at UM turned out to be good college players, but nobody on the line took a leap forward; Michigan hasn't had a disruptive rusher or run-stopper on that line since Mike Martin, a guy Hoke barely touched. Maybe a couple of the young guys like Mone, Henry, and Hurst take off, but then it's hard to tease out where the growth came from.
Charlton playing as a freshman bugged me because he had 2 tackles and yet appeared in 8 games, when you had guys like Strobel and Wormley ahead of him that could have sucked up those 50 or so snaps. Now, I don't remember the games in 2013 immensely well, so maybe there really was a dearth of options, but Charlton played in the opener against CMU, which made absolutely no sense. So even if it turned out they needed Charlton in the end, there wasn't any planning to start the year. That was my issue.
Kind of agree. Hoke and Co. seemed pretty good at turning maybe (and for lack of a better word off the top of my head) questionable guys into solid players but it didn't really seem like they took anyone to that elite level. Maybe they didn't have anyone who, despite recruiting rankings, could have been that elite dlineman...I don't know. While the dline was always pretty solid since the departure of Martin, it always seemed to lack one elite lineman who could consistently cause havoc by himself.
While this may have been somewhat because Hoke just didn't think redshirting was that important (he said as much once), they also seemed to just throw guys out there in the hopes that they'd strike gold. There's just no other way to explain playing Terry Richardson as a tiny freshman (against Bama!) and then redshirting him as a sophomore.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
I don't think we've seen nearly enough evidence from RJS' play to say that was a wasted red-shirt. Nothing against the kid - who seems like a solid depth player and special teams contributor - but big picture wise, Michigan is better off using his scholarship on a potential star recruit than bringing him back for a 5th year.
Pipkins played ahead of Henry, Wormley, and Godin as a freshman. We don't know what would have happened with different coaching and had he not blown out his knee. Yeah - it would have been nice (for all involved) to get him that red-shirt but Michigan needed players and Pipkins has size and talent.
Charlton too - kid made some plays AS A FRESHMAN. It would have been nice to red-shirt him, but that's what happens when poor recruiting, poor talent development, and high attrition happen -- good players are forced into the lineup.
We're not privy to the recruiting promises these guys get, nor or we privy to how much a recruit cares about plaing as a freshman. Anectodately - it matters. So, seeing other freshman play is helpful on that front.
Your thoughts about Hoke being overrated on DL development are ones I strongly agree with. I don't see how red-shirting would have helped much on that front. Better coaching will, hopefully. Lets worry about red-shirts when we are picking and choosing from elite recruits and have a 2-deep loaded with vets. Until then we have bigger concerns.
So, why is Morris in a different category? Pipkins played ahead of a bunch of his classmates (incl. Henry, Wormley, Godin). He wasn't great, but he was a useful freshman contributor and had his moments. Then he got hurt and missed a year. When he came back he had been passed over. In a world where Mone doesn't commit, he's probably a useful rotation player still. Meanwhile, Morris has been healthy (mostly) and given every opportunity to succeed and has looked basically inept.
I get that you're saying Borges isn't a good coach, but he's not such a terrible idiot as to be incapable of turning a high 4-star pro-style QB recruit into a viable college player. He's had success with QBs before, and might have again in a world where his OL was an asset and not an enormous liability.
As for Hoke/Mattison - we might be giving them a little too much credit on the DL because of 1997. Despite all the recruiting hype, none of the DL they have had have been elite performers. Clark was an athletic freak that never developed into a source of major production despite coaching that was purported to be elite. Pipkins, Strobel, and Rock were all bigtime recruits who busted in one way or another. Roh, Ojemudia and Beyer never exactly lived up to their potential/hype and didn't actually look that much better from the freshman selves as upperclassmen (though clearly, they did get bigger and became significant contributors). The best arguments for our last staff's DL production are: Mike Martin (who was already very good under RR) , RVB (who made a major senior leap) and developing Will Campbell from liability to non.
The DL obviously wasn't the train-wreck that the offense was but I don't think you can disentangle the OL/scheme conversion issues from player development entirely. In other words -- Morris can't use "I wasn't developed" as an excuse any more than Pipkins IMO.
Our line PROJECTS to be a strength of the team. We hope that's the case but we haven't seen it yet (like Peppers it's a matter of conjecture mixed with faith and optimisim.) Last year the DT weren't good enough to reap benefits from the nice work Clark was doing on the edge.
Last year we had 2 guys that Hoke recruited in their senior season plus the same guys we bring back this year and the DL was...OK. Not a weakness but also not an impact unit.
Glasgow is solid, but we're not talking about a kid the NFL is drooling about. Henry looked really good at times, but was heavily rotated. Mone isn't unlike Pipkins, in that we hope his freshman year was just a starting point. Wormley - a few flashes. Etc.
Look, I'm optimistic too and see enough depth to push somebody (Wormley) to DE, but the fact remains that the DL never played at a great level under Hoke since 2011 - and that was the one unit we though was in his wheelhouse.
Awhile ago Brian (I think) posted some stats showing the most a line has improved in a season. They suggested that the lines can improve most going to a spread and shred.
We don't have a spread and shred, but we do have one of the better O line coaches in college football. Any chance for a big bump if the starters remain stable?
There was another diary or article awhile ago looking at experience (whether it was years or starts), and it was concluded that the most critical part of the line was the middle. Presumably because one or two weaker tackles could be compensated by some solid TE or fullback play.
It'll be good to finally see the center of the line firming up in terms of experienced play.
I have to assume that the line will continue to mature and become a top-30 unit this year in terms of rushing (they were just outside the top 50 in S&P+ at the end of last year I believe), which should help the offense overall. I expect Cole to sniff all-conference, and it would be great for Kugler to knock Glasgow down to guard and maybe shake up the right side of the line with Mags and Braden.
But yeah, for the first time in what feels like a decade the offensive line should be at least solid across the board, and could be downright nasty if some of the RS juniors play up to the coaching they'll now be receiving.
I mean 2010 was pretty solid. I believe it was Lewan, Schilling, Molk, Omameh, and Huyge with Schofield in there too? Or am rating them based on their potential (how good they were in their final year)?
It was a good line, but the backfield protected them a bit with Denard's running abilities. It's why most spread lines tend to look pretty solid; guys can't hammer down when Denard can run past you in a millisecond. I'll agree that was a solid unit. I just think for the more "pro" offense Michigan is going to run, this is the best line they've had because everyone was basically recruited for it.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
This is a nice analysis and good perspective on maintaining patience. Given that we have a new coaching staff, I would say all these preliminary judgements should probably acknowledge an extra dose of uncertainty.
On Samuelson - there was always an expectation that we would have to wait with him. Per Brian's freshman preview "Samuelson is probably hanging around as the seventh or eighth lineman for a long time, with injury and washout his best shot at starting until he's a fifth year player." So yeah, its disappointing to not hear ANYTHING about his progress, it's not exactly a disaster. He was a late addition to the class, after the season when Hoke/Borges had time to process some of their doubts about the immediate development of Jack Miller and the '12 class. In other words they still needed numbers and Samuelson sounded like, at the very least a high character program kid ("blue collar") more than an elite talent. Sometimes being ready to compete just means you're happy to be there, work hard, and be a useful backup in practice, etc.
On Bosch - he seemed like a pretty decent player and his departure was a disappointment given he was at least considered to be on par, if not ahead, of his classmates his freshman year. Between him and Miller leaving, the OL depth is thin, especially if one of the presumed starters (or top 6 if you include Kugler) doesn't pan out.
In general, I don't think we need conjecture about unrenewed 5th years until we see what player X does in their 4th year.
get through the bar charts, the summary afterwards was awesome! Thanks for clearing up a lot of questions I've had about the OL!
Curious where this Kugler praise is coming from? Last we heard in spring he was having as much trouble as Cole doing basic snaps - and Cole had played center all of 6 practices where Kugler was supposed to be a college ready guy out of HS due to dad. That was the story near the end of spring ball so I am trying to figure out what progression has been made considering there has been little in organized team acitvity since.
What the shit, man.
Shane Morris and Dymonte Thomas should have been redshirted. Neither was ready to play as true freshmen. We had to burn Shane's redshirt for the meaningless bowl game against Kansas State.
But with Harbaugh bringing his own recruits, the 2013 class has to start producing this season. Otherwise, the younger players will pass them up.
Re: The sobering graphic of the top-rated 2013 recruits.
Notice that 6 of the 7 recruits are on offense. Not coincidentally, Michigan's offense was far behind its defense under Hoke - including the 2011 season when we went 11-2.
We don't know how much of Michigan's failures the past 3 seasons were poor evaluating versus poor coaching/development/gameplanning versus relying on inexperienced underclassmen. But the Harbaugh era should provide some insight.
I have not heard much about Samuelson, but what I have SEEN of Samuelson is not promising.
Comments