The Overcrowded Defensive Backfield?
Okay, I just want to break this down. I haven't tried my hand at analysis much, but I wanted to take on this recent confusion over why we're looking at so many Corners and Safeties. Please take this only as an attempt at reasoning through it. If you disagree, that's fine - I gave it the old college try.
Here we go.
We all know, there are a few highly rated DBs visiting over the next couple weeks. This year, with the offers we have out, there could be as many as seven DB prospects we get commitments from.
Locked in:
Blake Countess
Delonte Hollowell
Tamani Carter
Greg Brown
Possible:
Floyd Raven
Stefan McClure
Raymon Taylor
Here's our current roster (scholarship only):
CB: Troy Woolfolk, JT Floyd, Cullen Christian, Courtney Avery, Terrence Talbott
S (Jeremy Gallon is listed here, but yeah right): Josh Furman, Ray Vinopal, Cam Gordon, Thomas Gordon, Brandin Hawthorne, Carvin Johnson, Marvin Robinson, Jordan Kovacs
That means we're 4-deep at Safeties, but only 2 1/2-deep at corner. We are still going after DBs hard in this class, so that leads me to a few conclusions:
1) We need some Corners.
With Woolfolk having just his senior year left, and Floyd looking unimpressive (to be fair, the whole defense was unimpressive, but still...), we definitely need a few corners.
2) Cam Gordon will be switched back to Wide Receiver.
This is not data. This is intuition. We are recruiting a lot of, say it with me, Defensive Backs. We are not recruiting very many, one more time with feeling..., Wide Outs.
Our WRs are: Hemingway, Stonum, Roundtree, Odoms, Jackson, Miller, Stokes, etc. BUT...Miller (6'4'') and Jackson (6'3'') are very young, and the rest of the depth chart has Stonum as the tallest receiver at 6'2'' with a bunch of little slot guys. Cam is perfect for a West Coast style of offense. Stolen from Football 101 at calsci.com:
The ideal size of a receiver [in the West Coast Offense] should be at least 6'3'' and weigh about 210 pounds.
Anyone want to take a look at Cam Gordon's height and weight? Of course, build isn't everything, but he was a receiver when he was first recruited, so it's not really out of the question.
3) Two of these commits are taking the place of Vlad Emilien and Justin Turner.
We lost 2 Defensive backs in the last year, so even if we end up signing 7 DBs, it's kind of a net 5 due to replacing those two.
4) We might not NEED all seven.
The question is, since we have a real shot with McClure, Raven AND Taylor, who is the odd man out? My guess would be Delonte Hollowell. It's great that he's Blue, but even if he stays with us, he's probably relegated to backup duty for his time here, barring a miracle.
5) There will be a bunch of redshirts.
For obvious reasons, but I don't know who, because I don't actually know which would be better - to redshirt the not-quite-as-good to see if we can coach them up? or to redshirt the possible stars to give them more time in maize and blue?
6) A safety will move to LB
We have 7 LBs right now (before this recruiting class), and we could probably use more. There are a couple of players listed at Safety that could definitely be LBs - Furman and Robinson, specifically.
Conclusion: Do I think we'll end up with 7 DBs in the class? No. That's a lot of Defensive Backs, but it looks like there's room, somehow. If we get Raven and McClure, we definitely have to hang onto them, though. If a couple guys redshirt, and the ones who are ready to contribute stay on the roster, we'll end up with a pretty excellent secondary for quite a few years. Now if we only had a DB coach...
January 21st, 2011 at 11:01 AM ^
BEEF
on the O and D lines
January 20th, 2011 at 7:29 PM ^
You know what the Cam Gordon move back to wide out would make a lot of sense from a quantity standpoint. I know a lot of people see him at OLB. I do not. He hits hard, but boy in open space even at LB he could be exposed. He just is not agile, and not fast either. I don't know why we thought a possession wide out would make a good transition to the defensive side of the ball. The skillset just isn't there.
Boy that still is a lot of defensive backs esp. since we can going with one less defensive back in our base d.
January 23rd, 2011 at 10:01 PM ^
I thought Michian was the only school recruiting him with any intent on letting him play offense. From what I recall, he was most impressive at camps and such on the defensive side of the ball.
I actually thought both Gordons were pretty impressive. I look forward to seeing what they can do with some good coaching and some added beef.
January 20th, 2011 at 7:29 PM ^
First: Most likely at least two freshman CB's will redshirt, meaning they will not be 'active' until Woolfolk and Floyd are gone.
Second: As stated above, Furman, C Gordon, Bell and Hawthorne are for sure linebackers.
Third: If we play a 4-3 base, we will most likely move to a 4-2-5 nickel on passing downs which will need 3 strong CB's on the field a lot during games.
Fourth: Remember the 2006 Ohio State Game (They went 4-wide and we had no corner depth and the shredded us), The Horror and Post-apocalyptic Oregon games? How about us getting torched all year on defense?
Fifth: Remember how Woolfolk and JT Floyd got hurt this year and we were starting all freshman? Yeah, that sucked.
Moral of the story: NEED MOAR DB's
January 25th, 2011 at 4:32 AM ^
One of the hardest positions to project from high school to college D-1 are cornerbacks and defensive backs. Just for grins, recall that Woodson was a high school running back who won the Mr. Ohio High School football award. I am thinking that having established and experienced coaches like Mattison will allow us to properly evaluate and deploy talent to where it belongs on the field.
January 20th, 2011 at 8:07 PM ^
I just want to see more Carvin Johnson. I really wanted him to redshirt last year, but the DOOM defense we played eliminated that possibility.
January 20th, 2011 at 8:08 PM ^
After last season we need a lot of competiton out there. We need to be better and the only that will happen is with competiton at the position.
January 20th, 2011 at 8:10 PM ^
Isn't Greg Brown likely to become a LB eventually?
January 20th, 2011 at 9:13 PM ^
hope not,what have you been doing.Have you seen how tall he is,or how much he ways?
January 20th, 2011 at 11:43 PM ^
In these here parts we spell it, "weighs."
January 20th, 2011 at 8:33 PM ^
I am not sure why you think Hollowell isn't going to pan out? Please explain.
January 20th, 2011 at 8:37 PM ^
I think he'll pan out just fine. I just think his upside is limited due to his size.
January 20th, 2011 at 8:35 PM ^
Some of the guys you mention are already linebackers: Furman moved to WLB during the season, and is probably competing with Mike Jones to replace Mouton (or else the SLB position of Roh/Ezeh/Fitz). Hawthorne is a linebacker as well -- he was listed on the safety depth chart because we were so short on safeties. M-Rob is another guy you'd expect to take one of those linebacker positions -- I think he's a player in the mold of Mouton or Prescott Burgess with a lot of talent but not enough speed to play safety, meaning his future's at linebacker.
The Gordons are both guys with frames that would see them become linebackers, and would be if given time to mature before being thrown into the fray.
So imagine we bring in two of the remaining three prospects plus the current commits. At least two of the freshmen, probably three, will be needed at safety.
I expect Carvin Johnson will displace Vinopal at free safety. At strong safety, much as I like Kovacs's head, he's slow, and that opens up more space around him, and that makes our defense weaker. That's not going to change -- he is what he is -- so if Kovacs gets displaced this year that's a good thing (provided the substitution can at least make up for Kovacs's awareness with talent).
So where do six freshmen, plus last year's trio, fit in that? They're the entirety of our depth, and the future of those positions. Free safety and four cornerback positions need to be filled through 2012 with the talent on hand and in this recruiting class. If half don't turn out to be Big Ten caliber players -- which is better than 3-stars do in general -- that leaves Michigan with exactly as many players as they need. You've already seen what happens when two starters get injured. We didn't even have a dime package this year; 3rd and 16 might as well have been 3rd and 4. We need the dudes.
January 20th, 2011 at 9:19 PM ^
I like this breakdown. Don't know for sure if it all will turn out that way, but it's logical and it illustrates a key point -- don't underestimate the probability that the last staff's defensive coaches had many players out of position.
I thought Glen Mason had a good point when he looked at our players and said, "I saw good athletes who could run," but they couldn't make they plays because they were often fundamentally unsound. The problem was the scheme and they probably had a lot of the wrong guys out there. So I have to think we'll see players put in places where they can excel and I think Robinson could be a star at linebacker. I also am high on Carvin Johnson on the back end. He's a smart, private school kid from New Orleans who knows what to do and hits. Kenny Demens, J.B. Fitzgerald, Quinton Washington, Jibreel Black, Richard Ash, William Campbell -- it is not as hopeless as one might think if some of these guys step up. The season between the first and second year is the one when most players improve the most and we have a number of guys in that category.
I think we have some players. If Woolfolk steps right in and another corner emerges (sleeper: Christian is a great athlete, let's see how he does with better coaching), and we can land one hotshot (McClure? Taylor?), things start to look better. If we could get a handful of guys who redshirted last year and out of this year's class who can help on defense, this unit will get a lot better in a hurry. It's being coached now.
January 21st, 2011 at 12:48 AM ^
It seems to me that all offenses are incorporating more and more receivers in the formations. This is forcing more LB's to spend time covering fast receivers. 2009 and 2010 I was watching Michigan LB's incapable of covering Tight Ends for God's Sake. So the need at LB even in a 4-3 is that they be athletic. Now consider that in high school 17 year old speedsters just don't have the genetic material to be that at 220-230. So it seems the trend is that large frame safeties in High School are more and more a lock to become OLB as long as they follow the new S&C programs and bulk up with lean strength to preserve the speed.
Maybe I'm wrong, but since I started tracking the recruits it just seems like a good portion of the defensive recruits seem to shift down toward the line as they bulk up while continuing to become adults.
Well that and watching our defense that averaged an age of 19 literally bounce off all the Wisconsin offensive players who averaged an age of 22. I mean it seemed like no one could tackle, and it wasn't just not wrapping up or not making it to the player, it was like little ping pong balls bouncing off bowling balls.
you can't beat physics.
well unless you're like Bugs Bunny, and "haven't studied the law"
January 20th, 2011 at 9:43 PM ^
This is great. Thanks.
January 21st, 2011 at 9:33 AM ^
I've written this before, but here it is again. Go back and watch BGSU's only TD against us last year...Kovacs was out-running Cam trying to chase the WR down.
The OP is suggesting Cam back to WR, so is Kovacs really that slow? For a B1G safety, yes. But unless someone beats him down handily in camp, Kovacs will start again on the D. FWIW, I hope someone DOES beat him out, because that will mean we have an up-and-coming stud. Regardless, Kovacs will still see the field a lot.
January 21st, 2011 at 12:45 PM ^
Yeah but that is because Kovac actually wanted to catch him...
January 20th, 2011 at 9:34 PM ^
Delonte will be a part of our class in part because of being at Cass Tech IMO and we don't want to mess up our pipeline there
January 20th, 2011 at 9:51 PM ^
kovacs does well, but shouldnt there be someone who was supposed to be there doing BETTER then well?! he makes plays when most of the D is out of the play. dont get me wrong, i give him all the credit in the world for walking on and becoming a solid contributer. But...if we want to be the defesne we used to be, then someone MUST beat him out of the position
January 20th, 2011 at 10:34 PM ^
Due to the last 3 years of defensive recruits. I will take anyone Hoke and his staff wants. Their track record with defense is much better to what we have been used to the last 3 years
January 20th, 2011 at 10:37 PM ^
You can never have enough DB's, because I think its the second most position injured after the DL or OL. I think that we also need a lot more talent back there and we need to show a lot more improvement.
January 21st, 2011 at 6:58 PM ^
Don't be to down on Hollowells size , 2 words Antoine Winfield.
I dont see any of the Db prospects or current DB's moving to Wide out since we are so deep there.
Mattison ran a 3-4 most recently with a hybrid LB - DE ( joker) but has alot experience coaching both 4-3 and 3-4. I pray someone out plays Vanbergen and Kovacs in the spring and the coaching staff works with Gordon and Roh.
January 21st, 2011 at 10:21 PM ^
that someone outplays VanBergen? You know that VanBergen was playing at an all conference level at the end of season, and one of our more consistent players, right?
January 23rd, 2011 at 1:02 PM ^
Unless he gets hurt, VanBergen definitely starts next season. It was the other side, played by Greg Banks and others, where we were really hurting,
But if we put our best four out there on the D-line, it's going to be Martin, VanBergen, Roh and someone else. We need players who are in the system to make their mark, possibly starting with Richard Ash and Terry Talbott. It's hard to say from the mix of recruits over the past two seasons who is still even on the defensive line. One task for Mattison and crew is to straighten that out. Are Campbell and Washington on the O-line or D-line?
To me, the DT spot is overall, the weakest on our team, so we may be looking at playing a lot of 3-man fronts with varied, zone blitzers. Everyone is so focused on recruiting for the secondary, but the fact is the biggest glaring weakness is most likely going to be problems stopping the run. We just don't have depth there and we have not yet identified depth out of what we have. It will be very interesting to see what this coaching staff does with the roster it inherits. At LB, guys like Kenny Demens, J.B. Fitzgerald, Josh Furman, Jake Ryan, Isaiah Bell, Marvin Robinson. Who steps up? Guys who have been on the team will most likely outplay freshman. Experience is not everything. Greg Banks has been there forever and all he really proved last season was why he never played when we had better talent
I don't think we've signed a new defender yet who will get on the field this season, but if we get Willingham maybe he plays at LB. McClure possible at DB. We are signing a lot of talent, but these guys need some experience being in college, getting bigger, stronger, working their way up on the team.
I would say the goal is to redshirt most of the class, with just a few exceptions. If it's more than that, then our class has some surprises in it or our defense is just that bad. I have to think Mattison is going to go with experience and see how those players respond to his staff's coaching.
January 22nd, 2011 at 4:31 PM ^
Just because a player is recruited for defense doesn't mean they can't switch to offensive if they have the talent and there is a need. A lot of the defensive commits played two-ways in HS.
It is easier to convince a good athlete to switch from defense to offense than vice versa.
Maybe that is what BH and staff are thinking when they are offering so many DB's.
January 23rd, 2011 at 10:08 PM ^
what has happened with Tiric (SP?) Jones?
January 24th, 2011 at 5:03 PM ^
Teric moved back to RB and then blew out his knee... I forget what game it was.
January 24th, 2011 at 5:57 PM ^
if I remember correctly.
Comments