Another QB for 2010
Okay we have Gardner. Now who else should we try to get? We NEED 1 more qb for sure because Gardner is a little raw and Robinson is still an experiment and Sheridan is well....Sheridan. I think we might be able to get Christian Green. But that is a long shot.
http://rivals100.rivals.com/viewprospect.asp?pr_key=87825&Sport=1
We NEED another QB. I am still not very convinced that Robinson or Gardner will pan out. Hopefully.
We'll get one - it's only April. I think we'll get either Jones, Munchie or Green...at least one of those three. No worries...
I know it is early. I just don't want Tate to get injured and then Denard chokes or somehthing. This last year has made me VERY concerned about thin QB depth. I don't ever want to see this team like it was in 2008.
Why do we NEED another QB? We have Tate, Devin, and Denard now. When have we ever had the QB position 3 deep with talent? Not under Lloyd, and QB was never really an issue then, save for Navarre's first season. In fact, when does any program ever have more than 3 top guys competing for QB?
but RR says he likes to have 5 QBs on the roster. I don't think guys like Cone and Sheridan really count--at least not in the ideal depth situation. So I'm guessing he still would want a couple more over the next couple classes.
April 25th, 2009 at 10:00 PM ^
What part of Denard is an experiment don't you understand? Denard is not a great passer. He can run but it is likely that he will be swiched to another position later on. And Gardner is solid, but is still raw. And Sheridan is Sheridan.
What are you basing this on? The fact that he has blinding speed. Have you watched his tape or seen him play? Denard's probably ahead of Pat White at this point in his career as a passer, but he is definitely not Tate. The threat of him taking off will make defenders have to make quick decisions on staying in coverage or going after the QB. This will make the passing windows a little bigger.
We have the kid from Pioneer coming in as a walk on, but still need another QB commit.
April 26th, 2009 at 12:09 PM ^
In that case, why don't we just put Odoms at quarterback? QBs need to be able to throw, regardless of how fast he is. Denard is not a good passer. I am basing this on the fact that he completed fewer than 50% of his passes in high school among several other reasons.
April 26th, 2009 at 12:24 PM ^
Completion percentage is not the best way to determine a high school kid's ability. You don't know the talent level of his receivers, his offensive line's protection ability, or what kind of plays his coach called (were they low-percentage deep balls or high-percentage short throws?).
April 26th, 2009 at 10:43 AM ^
Gottat love when somebody who isn't around these players or at the games says something way different than the scouts.
April 26th, 2009 at 10:49 AM ^
Look, in all fairness (and I'm not saying Robinson can't be a great QB):
-If the "scouts" you are touting thought Robinson had a huge potential as a QB, he would have been rated as a QB, not an ATH. If it was widely agreed upon that he would be a great QB, then Florida wouldn't have offered him as a CB.
-He completed less than half his passes in his high school career.
Yes I realize he completed less then 50% of completion (kind of like U of M QBs last year), but did average 18 YPC and his passing yardage was down from the year before. I'm just referring to fact that everyone thinks run, run, run yet he had less than 500 yards rushing and lead his team to the state semis. Junior year had over 1900 yards passing.
Gardner did complete over 50% but for roughly the same amount of yards and he had a D1 prospect at WR. I think Gardner will be a much better QB, but Pat White wasn't a great passing QB and the WVU offense was a juggernaut.
September 24th, 2009 at 9:32 PM ^
all excellent points, we miss your insights please come back
September 24th, 2009 at 9:33 PM ^
I could un-banhammer his 6 or 7 comeback accounts if you really want...
April 25th, 2009 at 10:50 PM ^
In Lloyd's system we could get away with 3 QB's because they were less prone to leave the pocket and take hits in the open field. That's probably why RR needs more quality QB's. I believe we are still going to get a 2nd QB in this class, but it's still early to get worried about it. From everything I've read RR is still trying to get that second option and at this point we look goof for a couple of prospects, Jones and Munchie.
Lloyd may not have carried 3 QB's, but they were spread over a few classes, and normally at least one of them was somewhat established, in that they had played before, or Lloyd had seen enough of them in practice to be comfortable with them.
Michigan doesn't have a single viable QB who has taken a single snap in college, so, really, RR doesn't have a wonderful idea of what he has. Get it?
April 26th, 2009 at 12:45 PM ^
When have we ever had the QB position 3 deep with talent? Not under Lloyd.
How are you defining "talent"? If "talent" means "guys on scholarship," we were always three-deep or more under Carr. Here's a breakdown of scholarship QBs under Lloyd:
1995 - Brian Griese, Scott Driesbach, Tom Brady, DiAllo Johnson, Jason Carr
1996 - Griese, Driesbach, Brady, Jason Kapsner
1997 - Griese, Driesbach, Brady, Kapsner
1998 - Brady, Drew Henson, Driesbach, Kapsner
1999 - Brady, Henson, Kapsner, John Navarre, Andy Mignery
2000 - Henson, Navarre, Jermaine Gonzales
2001 - Navarre, Gonzales, Spencer Brinton
2002 - Navarre, Brinton, Matt Gutierrez
2003 - Navarre, Brinton, Gutierrez
2004 - Chad Henne, Gutierrez, Clayton Richard
2005 - Henne, Gutierrez, Richard, Jason Forcier
2006 - Henne, Forcier, David Cone
2007 - Henne, Ryan Mallett, Cone
All of these guys were recruited QBs and with few exceptions (maybe Mignery, Cone and Carr) were all highly-regarded. Only with the benefit of hindsight can we say that some weren't talented. It's possible that some of the QBs we currently have, or will have, won't end up being as good as we think, too. (Note as well that there was a fair amount of attrition.)
April 26th, 2009 at 12:48 PM ^
Yeah...we were actually three deep with talent almost every year. That statement was a bit misinformed.
April 25th, 2009 at 10:07 PM ^
I used to think that you were being treated unfairly here.
April 25th, 2009 at 10:37 PM ^
the last article that I read about Munchie said that we are number 1 on his list. I think the kid will probably commit soon and then I figure there will be one 4 star we go after every year until D Rob and Tate gradguate. In answer to the question why we need so many QBs I think RR wants a lot of back ups because as a dual threat guy they are twice as likely to get hurt. I know the arguement that Pat White never got hurt but I think it still stands to reason that if they run and throw they are more likely to take a nasty hit than if they just throw.
April 25th, 2009 at 10:38 PM ^
The problem right now is that the QB position is so thin that players are expected to come in and be great as freshmen. The position really needs to have enough depth that a kid can come in and spend a year learining the offense and getting Barwisized before he is expected to be the Baby Jesus of QB.
I won't be comfortable until there are at least three who have demonstrated that they can run the team, with one or two redshirts learning the offense.
As well as Forcier is apparently turning out, we still don't know about DRob or about Gardner until they actually get to Ann Arbor.
Really, right now, there are three known quantities on the team:
Forcier, who looked great against the second and third string defense.
Sheridan, who was terrible last year and needs to be "much-improved" to be of any help whatsoever.
Cone, who looks a lot like Threet did last year (slow and not much arm), but against third and fourth string players.
Anyone who is comfortable with that has a lot more faith than I do. And I would like to sell you some great land down here in Florida.......
April 25th, 2009 at 10:44 PM ^
Thank you! WE NEED QBS PEOPLE. Tate will be great, but what if he gets hurt? WE NEED DEPTH.
April 25th, 2009 at 10:51 PM ^
Use BOLD with your caps, so we really know that you're screaming like a maniac.
April 25th, 2009 at 10:48 PM ^
We will most likely get another pure QB and one that can play another position if QB doesnt work out.
April 25th, 2009 at 11:21 PM ^
Munchie!
Wait, so are you a troll, like you claimed a few days ago?
Overall, though, I agree with your point - we need another QB for depth purposes. It's not neccesarily going to be a top-100 sort of guy, because of the existing talent we have, but we do need more numbers there.
People, in general, need to realize that at leat half the recruits we pick up aren't going to pan out, in that, they're not going to become great college players. Tate Forcier and Devin Gardner are highly-rated players, but that's not a guarantee of anything, one or both may very well end up as busts. Scott Dreisbach, Jason Kapsner, Steven Threet, Matt Guttierez, and Clayton Richard were all highly rated QBs who, for one reason or another (injury, position change, transfer, pure bust) never panned out to do anything for Michigan. You need depth to combat that - the more QB's we have, the more likely we'll get one that can play.
stop posting so much
April 26th, 2009 at 10:48 AM ^
We're not getting Christian Green.
Also, he doesn't want to play QB.
Thanks for someone finally stating that one
April 26th, 2009 at 11:47 AM ^
is more guys like Tate. Guys that regardless of size that can throw well, make good reads, and have a little speed to create a running threat. Maybe it's rare that a guy can be so composed and throw with such accuracy, after all Tate has had a qb tutor forever, but seeing the accuracy that Tate has- and I don't want to hear he was playing 2nd/3rd stringers, he has a marvelous touch- and what guys can do with the ball whether they are 'in space' or not, I would much rather recruit that kind of qb then these 'prototypical' big dual threat guys with speed that are raw at passing and will take a couple years to really establish their 'A' game.
April 26th, 2009 at 11:53 AM ^
There aren't a ton of dual-threat guys who have accuracy like Tate. One good thing about Tate is that he could give us some time to develop one of those guys who isn't quite so polished (like Denard Robinson or Devin Gardner).
We have the guy who played better than coner in the spring game.