OMG, we lost our 3rd string QB!

Submitted by Magnus on

Shavodrick Beaver, who had been committed to Michigan since the spring, has changed his commitment to Tulsa. There had been rumors of him wavering, but he recruited heavily for Michigan and spoke publicly about how he couldn't wait to come to Michigan, was ready to compete for the job, etc. But now the #8 dual-threat quarterback is staying close to his home in Texas.

This event affects the perception of Michigan's program, but probably not the program itself. Most analysts and fans expected fellow QB commit Tate Forcier to compete with holdover Steven Threet for the starting quarterback job in 2009. A common scenario had Threet starting the season and slowly giving way to the more talented, more athletic Tate Forcier. If this scenario had played out, Beaver probably would have redshirted.

Looking forward, Threet is scheduled to run out of eligibility after the 2011 season. Forcier, if he doesn't redshirt at any point, would finish his four years in 2012. If the aforementioned scenario took place, Beaver would have redshirted, hung around for four years, and perhaps started as a fifth year senior in 2013.

Let me say that again.

Very realistically, Beaver's decommitment affects the 2013 season.

Now, depth is obviously a concern. Every team wants great players waiting in the wings to take over from great players. But is that realistic? Probably not. Assuming Forcier sticks with his commitment, we'll have two 4-star QB's over two classes of eligibility - and that doesn't include possible replacements for Beaver in the 2009 class, such as Tajh Boyd, Eugene Smith, or Denard Robinson (all 4-star players themselves).

Michigan will be okay. The Wolverines will plow through and be successful. The offense started to hit its stride at the end of the 2008 season, especially running the ball. If we can run the ball effectively without an effective QB, imagine what type of offense we will have when Threet improves his accuracy or Forcier steps in with his pinpoint accuracy and good athleticism.

We need not worry about the loss of our third string quarterback.

Go blue!

Comments

chitownblue (not verified)

December 21st, 2008 at 11:28 AM ^

You summed it up perfectly.

I'm not sure why everyone has this certainty that Forcier is a "better" recruit than Beaver - he is marginally ranked higher, but they are so close that it's essentially meaningless. This hurts us merely because having 3 viable candidates compete for the starting QB position is more likely to yield a positive result than having 2 viable candidates compete for the starting QB position.

Also, as Blue Durham notes, attrition is rampant. This year, according to Rivals rankings, we should have had a starting O-line of Boren at C, Zirbel and Alex Mitchell at G, and Schilling and Justin Schifano at tackle. All those players were at least 4-star recruits (not to mention Brett Gallimore, another 4-star O-line recruit who is no longer on the team). We had ONE of those. Again, based on rankings and "projected" depth charts, we should have had Chris Rogers (a top 50 recruit) playing LB for us this year, and 4-star Cobrani Mixon helping out, and ready to team with Jonas Mouton and Obi Ezeh as a true junior/RS sophomore. We could have had Antonio Bass at QB, and Eugene Germany (4-star) ready to step into the void at the other DE spot. We wouldn't have to depend on a true freshman and sophomore at DT, because Jason Kates and James McKinney (both 4-stars) would be around. You see how stupid this is? Any effort to look at Rivals rankings, and then forecast out a depth chart is folly.

Blue Durham

December 21st, 2008 at 2:36 PM ^

my casual assertion.

But God damn Chitown, we very well might have had one hell of a team with all of them guys!

Well, as they say, shit happens. Hmmm, since 2008 was such a shit season, maybe the saying should be changed to 2008 happens.

chitownblue (not verified)

December 21st, 2008 at 3:44 PM ^

Even more compelling is the QB situation. So, theoretically, once Henne leaves, our QB was supposed to be Clayton Richard. Well, Richard decides to play baseball instead, so we decide it's going to be Jason Forcier. We recruit a better prospect (Mallett), so Forcier transfers. Then there's the possibility that Antonio Bass is better than all of them. Then Bass gets hurt. Then Mallett transfers. And the guys we end with, competing for the job are two QB's who we didn't even recruit. So, at any given time, there literally 4 different players who were "supposed" to be starting for us this year. And not ONE was on the roster.

That's why it's funny to see "OMG, Taylor Lewan is the next Jake Long", etc. Half these four stars we're raking in won't ever see meaningful playing time for a variety of reasons.

chitownblue (not verified)

December 21st, 2008 at 4:41 PM ^

Even more compelling is the QB situation. So, theoretically, once Henne leaves, our QB was supposed to be Clayton Richard. Well, Richard decides to play baseball instead, so we decide it's going to be Jason Forcier. We recruit a better prospect (Mallett), so Forcier transfers. Then there's the possibility that Antonio Bass is better than all of them. Then Bass gets hurt. Then Mallett transfers. And the guys we end with, competing for the job are two QB's who we didn't even recruit. So, at any given time, there literally 4 different players who were "supposed" to be starting for us this year. And not ONE was on the roster.

That's why it's funny to see "OMG, Taylor Lewan is the next Jake Long", etc. Half these four stars we're raking in won't ever see meaningful playing time for a variety of reasons.

Jeffro

December 20th, 2008 at 2:32 PM ^

Seems to have a week dual threat class anyway. There was no Mike Vick, Vince Young or Terrell Pryor in this class. We'll be in the perfect position next year.

Elno Lewis

December 20th, 2008 at 8:30 PM ^

Went to ND after hearing some comments made by Dan Dierdorf on Monday Night Football. While Bo wasn't exactly happy about it, the program continued to flourish. When the UM has to depend on a single recruit to sustain, well, we are all in bad shiat.

I seriously doubt old Beav was intentionally trying to screw Michigan. He's just a kid. Jeez oh pizza, boys. Give it a rest. The kid's job is to serve himself, not us and certainly not a multi-billion dollar university like the U of M. Whatever his reasons it just doesn't matter.

Appreciate what you have--you are a fan of the greatest football team OF ALL TIME! How much more do you want?

Magnus

December 21st, 2008 at 1:00 PM ^

This post is filled with phrases like:

"...PROBABLY not the program..."

"...a COMMON scenario..."

"...IF this scenario had played out..."

I tried at every turn to say, "This is a potential scenario and it might not turn out this way, but this is a strong possibility."

Regarding the "most analysts and fans think Forcier will start" thing:

I know this isn't breaking news, but Forcier is ranked higher. By every recruiting service. I realize Beaver is still a highly ranked recruit, but recruits are ranked in order of who experts think is better. It's not that big of a leap to say that most analysts think that if anyone is going to challenge Threet, it will be Forcier. Now that that's out of the way...

Most comments from fans that I have seen have suggested that Forcier is better. If we put up a poll asking the question of who is more likely to start, I would bet a significant amount of money that Forcier would be the winner of that poll. He's had a personal QB coach, which has made him somewhat more polished than Beaver. He's ranked as the #1 most accurate passer by Rivals. Statistics aren't everything, but Forcier has had better stats in high school, especially when it comes to completion percentage (71% as a sophomore, 77% as a junior, and 60%+ as a senior).

My post left out a couple things that I thought we all knew, so I didn't bother to point them out, but:

1. We still have a shot to get in on Denard Robinson, Tajh Boyd, Raymond Cotton, or Eugene Smith for 2009.
2. Devin Gardner is right in our backyard, as is Robert Bolden, for 2010.

There is a logical reason for everything I said in this post. Perhaps you don't agree, and I might even be wrong - Beaver might win the Heisman at Tulsa while Forcier becomes a cokehead like Jeff Smoker. Who knows? But I'm not going to panic, and I don't think the rest of you should, either.

We shall see in four years (or perhaps sooner). But to say with any certainty either way is probably a mistake.

Also, the title of my post was a joke. It was meant to put things in perspective a little bit when everyone was panicking, but obviously, most people are a little too panicked at this point to take it anything less than 100% seriously.

chitownblue (not verified)

December 21st, 2008 at 1:22 PM ^

Magnus,

I'd agree that there is no reason for people to get ad hominem-y. But, you need to realize that when you write something like "this won't effect us until 2012", people may quibble with that. I think we all understand that you aren't speaking with 100% certainty, but people can still disagree with that premise - and they are. Your post states that YOUR OPINION is that this wouldn't effect us until Beaver's 5th-year Senior year. People have listed reasons why (he's comparably ranked with Forcier, OMG attrition, guru rankings aren't infallible, etc.). They're still allowed to do that.

Magnus

December 21st, 2008 at 1:26 PM ^

I absolutely agree. I don't think you'll find a comment from me where I said, "You're wrong for thinking Beaver might be good" or something like that.

I actually appreciated the last few posts that were made (including yours). I just wanted to clear up some of the misperceptions about the connotations of my post.

funkywolve

December 23rd, 2008 at 2:10 AM ^

While losing Beaver probably isn't a reason to panic, it definitely doesn't help the UM QB situation. At this point, UM's QB situation is hoping for one of two things (if not both): 1) Threet improves quite a bit in the off-season, 2) Forcier comes in and shows he is capable of having a decent year (and by decent I don't even mean first or second team all big ten). Not that Beaver was guaranteed to be ready to lead UM, but it at least was another option - especially with regards to depth and injuries.

Should neither 1) or 2) occur, we are probably looking at another year of QB play like we had to endure this past year. Then we're back to where we are this off-season: hoping one of the returners improves a lot or a true frosh can come in and give UM some decent QB play.

Obviously, there was no guarantee Beaver would have been able to come in and play right away, but I think it at least gave most fans a little more piece of mind knowing that there might be 3 possible options for next year instead of two.

blueman

December 23rd, 2008 at 12:54 PM ^

either Sheridan or Cone. What the hell did Lefty see in Cone to make him offer? Further, how the hell did Threet spend a year with Lefty and still have the worst mechanics of any starting UM QB since who knows?

Magnus

December 23rd, 2008 at 1:21 PM ^

Maybe this doesn't make a world of difference, but Threet and Loeffler were only together from whenever Threet transferred in (June or July, I think) until the bowl. That's a whole season, yes, but it doesn't include spring practices, off-season workouts, etc.

Monk

December 25th, 2008 at 12:43 PM ^

Having read the initial post and comments, I think the original post laid out a reasonable scenario as sort of a best case analysis of the situation and I agree that SB would have redshirted in 2009. However one could reasonably argue that TF would not have progressed as well as the coaches would like, gets some PT but is a backup and Threet establishes himself as the starter. In 2010, SB comes in and eeks out #2 after fall practice, and RR decides to use Threet and Beaver ala Leak/Tebow and SB moves to a solid #2 since he's the best fit for RR's system.

And the comment about the offense hitting it's stride shows a little maize and blue bias, the offense scored 7 pts against NW and OSU, went 6 for 39 in 3'rd down conversion in those games, that is not an offense hitting its stride.

Magnus

December 25th, 2008 at 10:08 PM ^

I was specifically talking about the running game, which did well against Purdue, Minnesota, and Northwestern. There were some good running plays against OSU, especially to the right side and before Brandon Minor got dinged up. We were also successful passing the ball against Purdue and Minnesota, although not against Northwestern and Ohio State. The offense definitely improved as the season went along.