2010 Wide Receiver recruiting
We currently have three WR commits (Ricardo Miller, Jeremy Jackson, Jerald Robinson). Offers are still going out (DJ Williamson, for example).
New reports are saying that Williamson could commit as early as this weekend.
I'm not one of those people who thinks "OMG Rodriguez doesn't know what he's doing", but I would like to know his reasoning behind all the offers. By the end of this week, we very well could have four wide receiver commits for 2010 - and that doesn't include elite guys like Kenny Shaw or Chris Dunkley, who are still in the mix.
I have to think that the coaches are planning to move some of these guys to different positions. There have been rumors that Miller and/or Jackson will play tight end, but I don't know if I believe that. Robinson is also a good safety prospect. Williamson could play corner, I guess.
Are they planning position switches?
Are any of the commits going soft?
Are the coaches expecting any current receivers to transfer?
Are the coaches going soft on any of the commits?
Is this just an overall commitment to improving team speed and then figuring out positions later?
I don't know any inside information. I'm just trying to figure it out.
It could speak to RR's opinions on our current WR's on the roster. And, supposedly, Williamson is a dynamo return guy. Could a player receive a schollie just b/c of that ability (a la Morales receiving an offer by Lloyd to long snap)?
I had the same questions/concerns, then about a month ago someone on here posted a very good post explaining the method to RR's madness. I didn't save or memorize that post but it went something like this.
RR plans to have 3-4 WRs on the field at all times, shying away from a traditional TE positions as we know it. His goal is to have enough WRs that they can just rotate these 6-8 guys often to keep them fresh and tire the shit out of the opposing teams' cover guys.
I think there were other reasons such as injuries and the such. But for the most part RR sees the WR, both edge and slot guys, as his biggest need from a numbers game in order to run his offense effectively.
That said if you too many of these guys in each class you won't have room for the elites, or they will want to play elsewhere.
This makes sense in a way, but the roster for 2010 looks like this:
1. Hemingway
2. Clemons
3. Stonum
4. Odoms
5. T. Robinson
6. Rogers
7. Roundtree
8. Miller
9. Jackson
10. J. Robinson
11. Shaw?
12. Williamson?
Even if Shaw and Williamson redshirt and another guy sits out because of injury, that's 9 scholarship WR's ready to play. And with the 85 scholarship limit, 1 out of 7 players on the roster would be a WR.
(I understand this post assumes that we'll get guys who are uncommitted and that there won't be any attrition, but from the coaches' perspectives, they WANT those uncommitted guys and they probably have no clue if any of those guys will transfer/flunk out/whatever, so I think it's a fair assumption.)
March 10th, 2009 at 12:34 AM ^
You can add Stokes, Gallon, and Feagin to that list too.
Yeah, I was in a hurry before bed and listing guys off the top of my head...
Clemons, Odoms, Robinson and Shaw would all be slot guys, which is an entirely different position than outside WR in RR's offense. So, that would leave us with 9 outside WR (you left out Stokes and Gordon- but I think Gordon is going to defense). Rogers does not have much of a future here. So, now we are down to 8 outside WR. Jerald Robinson is also probably going to switch to safety. Now, that leaves us with 7. Williamson redshirts, and that leaves us with 6 competent outside WR (or, a three-deep depth chart). So...
Outside WR in 2010:
Hemingway and Stonum (starters)
Miller and Stokes (more than capable backups)
Jackson/Roundtree/Rogers (limited PT)
Willamson (redshirt)
Slot
Gallon (fingers crossed), Robinson, Odoms, Clemons, Feagin, and one of Jones and Smith.
So, not counting Shaw if we land him, and assuming Robinson and Gordon shift to defense, we have 14 WR-type players. With 85 scholarships, the schollie breakdown could go like this under RR:
QB- 5
RB- 8
WR- 15
Ol-15
That would be 43 scholarships for offense, and the other 42 for defense. Seems like it could work.
the only other WR we might get is kenny shaw. id think that'd be the end of it. we have what 3 WR commits at the moment? so if you add williamson and shaw that'd be 5. not sure what the problem is then. i think people think just because other positions haven't committed that we're only recruiting WRs. there's no way chris dunkley is coming btw. i doubt we get any more receivers outside of shaw.
"Not sure what the problem is then."
The problem is that approximately 20 scholarships are currently available. Given that
(1) there is a relative lack of depth defensively (corner, LB, DT especially)
(2) RR likely seeks two QB commits in this class
(3) RR probably wants at least 2-3 RBs because of the departures of Minor, Grady, and Brown,
(4) RR almost definitely wants at least one or two offensive linemen for continuity,
should the coaching staff really invest nearly one quarter of all available scholarships at one position? I personally have my reservations there. Three new outside WRs seems legitimate; behind Mathews and possibly Hemingway (unproven) and Stonum (disappointing season), there is a glaring lack of depth at outside receiver. If RR wants to add another slot receiver, fine.
But 5 receivers in one class--on paper--perplexes me.
a) I wasn't suggesting that we're only recruiting wide receivers. I'm keeping pretty good track of our offers on my blog, and we've offered about 70 guys. They're not all wide receivers. I know that.
b) If we get Williamson and Shaw, that would give us five wide receivers. This class is expected to be around 20, so that's 25% of the recruiting class devoted to one position. That's a pretty high number, especially once you consider that we're losing 3 running backs, need a couple QB's, and have major needs on defense almost across the board.
c) I know we probably won't get Dunkley, but still, we've got offers out to a bunch of big-time WR prospects (Dunkley, Prater, Tai-ler Jones, De'Joshua Johnson). I don't imagine that we'd want to turn a couple of those guys down if they commit. We could pull something like we did with Peace or Barnes where we kind of force them to look elsewhere, but I don't think that's the ideal way to handle it.
I'm not panicking about the number of WR commits, because I'm sure Rodriguez knows what he's doing. I'm just wondering what conclusions can be drawn from the situation.
See recent post: http://www.mgoblog.com/diaries/whence-all-receivers
Summary: the Tate will spray the ball all over the field at scampery quick electron guys who will either turn and catch the ball quick or get their eyeballs shot out or the ball stuck in one ear. Big slow Linebackers and overwhelmed 2ndary will be helpless. Should opposing team load the backfield with all corners, our revitalized O line and solid RB's will take over. Yeah for us! But I wonder about the D....
March 10th, 2009 at 12:04 AM ^
Magnus, Jerald Robinson and DJ Williamson can go both ways. I don't think they're sold on them staying at receiver yet, and with the need for more defensive players I think they like the kid that can play different spots. I know you probably know this already, but I've looked at it too and I think they're being smart. I just contacted Williamson's coach today, so I'm going to try to talk to him in the next couple days. I was going to ask DJ and his coach if he wants to play D.
I think he's just maximizing his commitments. If the kid isn't a starter as a receiver, then try him out on defense. As long as the recruits don't mind, I actually kind of like it.
March 10th, 2009 at 12:08 AM ^
If the kids are open to playing the other side of the ball, I'm all for it. I'm not too high on Robinson as a receiver, but I think he could be a pretty good safety. I haven't seen enough of Williamson to know whether I'd want him on defense or not.
Anyway, thanks for the input.
March 10th, 2009 at 12:15 AM ^
I feel the same way about Robinson. From talking to him he seemed open, as long as he gets a shot at receiver first. If I get ahold of Williamson, I'll make sure to ask him.
March 10th, 2009 at 12:31 AM ^
20 Scholarships
4-5 WR
2 QB
2-3 RB
1-2 OL
9-12 Scholarships for Offensive Players
8-11 for Defensive Players
Depending on how things play out with commitments, this class should very well be balanced on both sides of the ball as far as numbers go. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe there is only 2 senior starters on defense. (Graham and Brown) So this class doesn't need to be defense heavy.
I think this is funny because when Rodriguez got here, all I heard from OSU fans was that Michigan wouldn't be able to recruit WRs to play in this offense. Now, in his second full recruiting season, Michigan fans are concerned that we are getting too many WRs.
I disagree when you say that this class does not need to be "defense heavy."
Given the complete absence of depth at DT, very little at DE, questionable depth at LB, practically zero at CB, and a host of unproven backups at safety, Michigan definitely needs to emphasize the defensive positions. Helmuth switching to DT could be a harbinger of problems ahead, just as alarms sounded when Ferrara was switched to guard.
Comparatively, the offense is in much better shape, especially with regard to the offensive line, where Michigan almost assuredly will not repeat the need to convert another player from a different position out of desperation.
Perhaps Magnus is correct in that the coaches hope to shuffle players around depending on need. But I'm inclined to say that Michigan should recruit more defensive players than offensive players this year.
March 10th, 2009 at 10:40 AM ^
i'm not quite sure what the cause for concern is. RR is recruiting very good prospects. Just b/c we may not get Dunkley or Shaw doesn't mean that the guys we have aren't good. They are likely all 4* receivers with Ricardo a possible 5*. RELAX. It's super early and by coincidence the only guys who have committed have been WRs. For some reason I feel certain that RR isn't recruiting a class only of WRs. Again, this is a good thing. Getting quality recruits is good.
March 10th, 2009 at 11:25 AM ^
First of all, Dunkley is better than any of our commits, perhaps save Miller. Shaw might be, too. I'd take Dunkley, Shaw, and Tai-ler Jones over Jackson and Robinson. Not that our commits are bad, but they're not the best in the class.
Secondly, I don't need to "relax." I'm plenty relaxed. As I said over and over on this thread, I know Rodriguez knows what he's doing - I'm just trying to figure out what that is.
Third, getting quality recruits is a good thing. We got good recruits this year, didn't we?
Yes, we did.
And yet we still have holes at DT, DE, LB, CB, S, and QB.
I'm not questioning the quality of the recruits. I'm trying to figure out where all of these guys will play, because having 15 receivers on the roster is not exactly optimal.
March 10th, 2009 at 11:43 AM ^
ok, i'm not criticizing your post i'm just responding to it. I said relax because you managed to ask 5 different questions at the end of it.
Anyways, how do you know that Dunkley is such a better WR than our current recruits? According to Scout? Rivals? Kevin Grady was rated higher than Darren McFadden too.
Also, it's only March. We have 11 months until signing day to fill those holes that ya listed.
Recruiting tends to make fans crazy and I understand it cause i'm the same way. But it's just soooo early in the process and much too early to be overthinking all of this.
March 10th, 2009 at 11:50 AM ^
I was asking those questions because they're questions I have, not because I'm in a frenzy.
I know Dunkley is better than Robinson and Jackson. You can't watch film of those three and come to any other conclusion. Obviously, Robinson could turn out to be the second coming of Jerry Rice and Dunkley could be Carl Tabb, but those results aren't likely.
March 11th, 2009 at 11:32 AM ^
Dunkley is #61 on the Rivals 100.
Miller, Robinson, and Jackson aren't in the top 100 at all.
March 10th, 2009 at 10:56 AM ^
It was mentioned below, but here's the link to the diary, called "Whence All the Receivers"
http://mgoblog.com/diaries/whence-all-receivers
(If someone gets that the title is a play off of a history guest lecture about the Jutes, you get an Anglo-Saxon cookie)
March 10th, 2009 at 11:14 AM ^
misopogon.... i enjoyed that diary..do you think RR is turning mich into the next texas tech ...i hope he doesnt abandon the run so much
I don't think RR is turning Mich into the Air Raid. TT's offense, I think, limits itself by committing wholly to the pass. They spread out their offensive linemen so that any pass rush is controlled for at least 1.5 seconds, but puts blockers too far away from each other to form a running seam.
TT and WVa. are similar schools, in that they're programs who try to compete at the level of major programs, but have major institutional disadvantages. Such schools can, when successful, pull in a spattering of high-end recruits. However, they'll never haul in 25 4- and 5-stars. So it's useful for such schools to focus on a certain position. If you can get a 5-star, a 4-star, and a slew of 3- and 2-stars every year, you want to emphasize where the few blue chips go and de-emphasize the positions you filled with the rest. That's what the Air Raid offense did -- focusing on receivers and quarterbacks because he couldn't compete with Texas and A&M for tailbacks and O-linemen. That's what RR's WVa. offense did, putting all its marbles into the QB and a few running backs.
The difference is at Michigan, you have the ability to recruit blue chips all over the field. I don't see RR abandoning the run -- far from it; he's going to run like the dickens. But he's also going to pass like the dickens. He's gonna dickens opponents all over the field, so that they won't know which way they being dickensed.
If it's like anything, I'd compare it to Urban Meyer's offense, but obviously tailored to what talent we have here.
To downside is you really don't see any one player -- except the quarterback -- wracking up massive yardage. But you put threats all over the field, and keep those threats threatening, so that every down the defense has to be equally worried about two deep routes, a QB draw, and an HB slip, a slot bug underneath, and a Brandon Minor told he gets candy if he knocks out your teeth.
To hit them all over takes having talent all over. If you're going to pass deep, you need big, hulking o-linemen to hold off the rush while the receiver gets downfield. If you're going to run the spread option, you need speedy, hard-nosed o-linemen to pull off reach blocks. Only at a truly top school could you expect to recruit guys who can do both. You also need tailbacks who can run in space, and who can plow North-South. You need a quarterback who can make quick, smart decisions, can juke a guy out of his shoes, can beat a safety down the sideline, and can get the ball anywhere with accuracy. And you need lots and lots and lots of receivers -- big ones, small ones, leapy ones, jukey ones, possession ones, and speedy ones -- and preferably many of those traits.
March 10th, 2009 at 11:46 AM ^
You really should put some time into your diaries and not just post whatever you can pound out in two or three minutes.
March 10th, 2009 at 11:27 AM ^
But IMO, it's too early to focus that much on the larger recruiting goals of the program. RR knows as well as anyone how fluid the process is (at one point last year, fans were envisioning Newsome and Beaver throwing the ball to McNeal and Peace), and coupled with his penchant for taking "athletes" (even if they all primarily play WR in HS - many college coaches don't care as much where a kid plays in HS because HS coaches play their best kids at any spot of need, not based on college projection), I wouldn't read into how many WRs (or any position) we get or offer in March.
March 10th, 2009 at 11:35 AM ^
he's also not coming out of Florida.
It's not like RR is offering nothing but recievers; it's just the WR's who are signing first.
Also, as many posters have covered, there are many in the group who could possibly move to defense if neccessary.
I think this will all work out fine. And I hope those who see the offense returning closer to its run and shoot roots are correct. I thought that's what they were going to do last year, and would have done with mallethead had he stayed.
RR turned lead-footed Shaun King into an NFL QB. I hope this means we will see a lot of passing from this year on. In the spread option, it seems to be a lot easier to use the pass to set up the run than vice-versa like the rest of football historically has done.
Also, it would be great to see UM continue their tradition of sending WR's to the NFL.
Once again, Shaun King rushed for over 600 yards (4.1 ypc) in Rich Rod's offense in 1998. He was not a lead-foot.
And ran for 400 yards in his only full season as an NFL starter.
Looks manageable to me. 15 guys that can play slot/WR: 3 starters, 5 capable back-ups, 3 red-shirts, 1 position switch, and 3 that go unused (which is common). And that's assuming we pick up two more commits, ignoring injuries, and ignoring transfers. 5 back-ups may seem like a lot, but a few of those guys will be underclassmen and will have a better chance to play further in the future.
I don't think it's very common for a team to have three scholarship players at one position who never see the field. I realize last year was a strange year, but the only guys on the team who rode the bench for their entire careers were Brandon Logan and Doug Dutch - one LB and one WR/CB. If we have three WR's who don't contribute anything in their 4/5 years at Michigan, then we should definitely question Rodriguez giving ~15 scholarships to WR's.
he likes to have that many receivers on the roster
I know that a no-huddle offense takes a lot of endurance (especially at WR) and will eventually wear down an opponent's secondary. Perhaps by having a stable of WRs Rich Rod wants to be able to wear opponents down and have the ability to always have fresh legs available that could lead to bigger plays against a fatigued secondary?
Another thing to consider is how far away these players are from seeing the field. While we had to play a lot of freshmen last season and it looks like we may have to play some this season, come 2010 we will hopefully have a solid group of returning starters and won't need to play many freshmen at all. If thats the case, many of these WR's can redshirt and not see the field until 2011. Come 2011, how many of our current WRs will we have? Not only do some run out of eligibility, others may declare for the draft early. On top of that, do we expect all of our redshirted freshmen to be starters that year? So maybe they start as redshirt sophomores instead.
If we do haul in 4 good WRs this year, that basically means we probably won't recruit WR heavily in the coming year or two. But I don't think its terrible for this class.
Quite obviously, position changes and attrition will occur. But here's how it sets up for the next few years...
WR's in 2009:
1. Mathews (SR)
2. Stonum (SO)
3. Odoms (SO)
4. Savoy (5th SR)
5. Feagin (SO)
6. Robinson (RS FR)
7. Roundtree (RS FR)
8. Stokes (FR)
9. Clemons (JR)
10. Hemingway (RS SO)
11. Gallon (FR)
12. Rogers (JR)
13. Gordon (FR)
14. T. Jones (FR)
WR's in 2010:
1. Stonum (JR)
2. Odoms (JR)
3. Feagin (JR)
4. T. Robinson (RS SO)
5. Roundtree (RS SO)
6. Stokes (SO)
7. Clemons (SR)
8. Hemingway (RS JR)
9. Gallon (SO)
10. Rogers (SR)
11. Gordon (SO)
12. T. Jones (SO)
13. Miller (FR)
14. Jackson (FR)
15. J. Robinson (FR)
WR's in 2011:
1. Stonum (SR)
2. Odoms (SR)
3. Feagin (SR)
4. T. Robinson (RS JR)
5. Roundtree (RS JR)
6. Hemingway (5th SR)
7. Gallon (JR)
8. Gordon (JR)
9. T. Jones (JR)
10. Miller (SO)
11. Jackson (SO)
12. J. Robinson (SO)
WR's in 2012:
1. T. Robinson (5th SR)
2. Roundtree (5th SR)
3. Gallon (SR)
4. Gordon (SR)
5. T. Jones (SR)
6. Miller (JR)
7. Jackson (JR)
8. J. Robinson (JR)
Etc.
March 11th, 2009 at 12:37 PM ^
is can any of these guys see at night? Anyone can pad their stats with afternoon games. Can they catch the ball at it's highest point at 9:45 pm?