Auburn not a concern for recruiting of Dee Hart?
September 26th, 2010 at 6:27 PM ^
I think he is leading us to think Hart is on his way to Michigan. Tom left this vague on purpose though so who knows.
September 27th, 2010 at 5:25 AM ^
I don't know what everyone else thinks but even though Auburn might not be a concern everything else still is untill he signs with us. Not sure how to take that post by Tom VH. I am going to just keep telling myself that it is positive.
September 26th, 2010 at 6:28 PM ^
Your last sentence sums up the implication nicely. Per twitter.com/tomvh
I'll say this, and read into it how you will, but I'm not worried about Auburn with Demetrius Hart's recruitment.
September 26th, 2010 at 6:29 PM ^
September 26th, 2010 at 6:33 PM ^
Even if Dee went to Bama, he would sit behind Ingram and Richardson.
September 26th, 2010 at 6:38 PM ^
September 26th, 2010 at 6:44 PM ^
I agree, I wont feel relaxed until he is in class in Jan. In my view, Bama uses a different system for their RB's and Richardson may stay for more than just next year. You definitely hear more being down there. Even though I want Dee for his talent, I think if he commits, he can bring in alot of top guys. If he doesnt, some of those top guys make not give us another look. Just my opinion.
September 26th, 2010 at 6:40 PM ^
September 26th, 2010 at 6:30 PM ^
I would think we are in the driver's seat but who knows. All 3 have drawbacks in my opinion. It just depends on what is the most important factor for Dee. Good luck to Dee, is all we can do.
September 26th, 2010 at 6:34 PM ^
has Dee's mom visited Bama?
September 26th, 2010 at 8:43 PM ^
I'm just hoping he brings his uncle who can give it a 7/10 like Auburn.
September 26th, 2010 at 6:35 PM ^
I think it's farily obvious why Auburn would not be a realistic threat for Hart. Just look at their depth chart, including eligibility year. In particular, see: Dyer, Michael.
September 26th, 2010 at 6:35 PM ^
...January enrollment as to where DHART ends up.
September 26th, 2010 at 6:35 PM ^
with great family guidance. I'm sure he will make the right decision. And usually when mom's involved UM wins out.
September 26th, 2010 at 7:07 PM ^
Aw come on, that still hurts.
September 26th, 2010 at 7:54 PM ^
It may still hurt, but that is whom i immediately thought of aswell. Let's hope it doesn't go ROJO on us.
September 26th, 2010 at 8:21 PM ^
The difference is that Dee's mom actually likes Michigan which makes her the polar opposite of what went down with Rojo. I'm pretty sure if the coaches went to see Dee in school his mom would not pull him out of school so the coaches wouldn't see him.
September 26th, 2010 at 6:36 PM ^
Bama has always been my biggest concern for several reasons: (1) Clinton Dix (Dee's H.S. buddy is going there); (2) Ingram will leave after this year; (3) Bama's offense revolves around the running game; and (4) Saban is a hell of a recruiter and appears to be getting the last crack at DH.
If you saw yesterdays' Alabama game, they basically won because the the Razonrback defense couldn't get off the field. Bama ran the ball down their throats and Mallet lost his cool. It was a showcase game for the Alabama tailbacks...
Auburn has Dyer (a Freshman) who's pretty well entrenched at the RB position. He was generally considered one of the top 2 high school RB prospects last year. I saw him play last night and he looked good. If PT is the main consideration you would think we have the edge over Auburn...
September 26th, 2010 at 6:40 PM ^
I thought Mallett's multiple fourth quarter picks were a bigger factor, but they did run really well.
September 26th, 2010 at 6:41 PM ^
While Ingram will probably be gone, Trent Richardson will still be there and still have two years of eligibility remaining.
September 26th, 2010 at 6:44 PM ^
that although he might excel here, our offense will revolve around the QB for the forseeable future. Ingram gets the press in Saban's offense. We don't know what all the variables are for Hart and his ma, and I am still hopeful based on all the good vibes generated early.
September 26th, 2010 at 6:57 PM ^
If you saw yesterdays' Alabama game, they basically won because the the Razonrback defense couldn't get off the field. Bama ran the ball down their throats and Mallet lost his cool. It was a showcase game for the Alabama tailbacks...
Have to disagree - If Mallett doesn't give away the ball on either of the last two possessions then Arkansas wins that game. He completely choked, especially on the last interception when he couldn't even keep it together enough to throw the ball away. Pure and simple, Mallett lost the game and Alabama was luck y to get the win.
September 26th, 2010 at 7:11 PM ^
I agree that Mallet lost the game. But the Razorbacks couldn't stop the run in the second half. The running game kept the game close which opened the door to the Mallet collapse. But my main point is that Bama runs a very conventional offense that relies heavily on the running game. As I said this was a showcase game for the Bama running backs. This is a concern because apparently Dee Hart has been told that while Michigan offense also relies heavily on the running game our attack features the QB much more prominently...
September 26th, 2010 at 9:06 PM ^
If I were an unreal high school RB prospect, wanted by all of the power programs, Michigan would be my first choice based on the perspective of my experiences. However, if you asked me to name another school that would be appealing for similar reasons (assuming no other emotional ties), I would say Alabama. I will fly to Ann Arbor and jump off the Bell Tower if he chooses Alabama, but I would not fault him severely if he does. neg away, boys if you need to.
September 26th, 2010 at 11:12 PM ^
UM vs. Alabama academics is no comparison.
Also, it appears D. Hart is interested in going to a program where there is minimal possibility of a coaching change. While Rich Rod has been on the "hot seat" in the media, his job does appear reasonably secure given the 4-0 start and the ninja dominance that begins in 2011. Saban, on the other hand, is your classic merc who could jump ship at any time for the right NFL job, or if the NCAA starts poking around about the "medical" scholarships, etc.
September 27th, 2010 at 2:54 PM ^
September 26th, 2010 at 6:38 PM ^
My feeling is this: If Tom thought Alabama had a very realistic shot, he probably wouldn't have thrown this out there at all. I don't think he's just toying with all of us.
September 26th, 2010 at 10:50 PM ^
Dudes best friend is going there, I know he's supposed ot be a silent commit already, but I'm still nervous.
September 26th, 2010 at 6:41 PM ^
http://alabama.rivals.com/croster.asp?Team=ALABAMA&Sort=3
Assuming Mark Ingram leaves they still have 5-6 RBs with eligibilty left for next year (though Saban can get around that). I guess we'll see how much that facotrs into his decision.
September 26th, 2010 at 6:49 PM ^
Our cuurent RB's are not exactly chopped liver and Denard is going to get a lot of carries. DH might be better than our current young RB crop but still lots of competition here too remember.
September 26th, 2010 at 7:10 PM ^
While Michigan does indeed have a nice group of running backs, they aren't on the same level. Dee Hart would instantly be the RB with the most raw talent of all of the Michigan backs the moment he stepped on campus.
The number of QB carries really shouldn't be a concern. Some games it will be higher than others, depending on which approach teams decide to take, but ultimately it should look a lot more like '07-'08 WVU where White and Slaton had an almost equal number of carries, but with all backs factored in the carries were about 1/3 QB and 2/3 RB. Michigan isn't really all that far off of that ratio right now, actually, but Denard's (approximately) 1/3 is compared to the RB 2/3 being split almost equally between Smith and Shaw. The split in Rodriguez's normal scheme seems to have the QB and RB1 having about equal carries, with RB2 having about half as many as RB1.
To exemplify why the concern about number of carries is a perceived, rather than real, concern, consider the following. 200 carries is a pretty benchmark number for the number top flight running back in college football. The feature back under Rodriguez at WVU exceeded 200 carries in 2005, 2006, and 2007. In fact, the primary back for Rodriguez in those years was consistently had among the highest number of carries in the nation. And that was with Pat White. The concern that you've expressed really should not be a legitimate concern for Michigan's recruits.
September 26th, 2010 at 7:23 PM ^
I'm sorry if this seems snippy, because you can't yet inject tone into a thread post, but I'm tired of seeing the current and future Michigan teams compared to WVU. They aren't the same team and the offense has evolved since then. As for Dee Hart, I'd love to have him, but there is no way in hell you can say that he is ahead of the stable of backs Michigan has right now. He has tons of potential and could get there, but for obvious reasons I refuse to make grandious statements about what Dee will be. I'd be more excited if he could play in our secondary or as a linebacker to be honest.
September 26th, 2010 at 7:34 PM ^
I'm sorry if this seems snippy, because you can't yet inject tone into a thread post, but I'm tired of seeing the current and future Michigan teams compared to WVU. They aren't the same team and the offense has evolved since then.
It doesn't sound snippy, but I don't understand what you are upset about. WVU is an ideal comparison to where Michigan's offense is going, with some slight variation that certainly occurs with the scheme. I do agree, however, that they aren't the same team. The scheme implemented at Michigan is nowhere near the scheme Rodriguez ran at WVU (i.e. it was much higher at WVU). Michigan fans who didn't watch much of Rodriguez at WVU likely don't have the slightest conception of how much of the offense has yet to see the field in a game, and very likely hasn't even seen the practice field yet. The offense that we've seen so far this year is still very much a watered down version of the offense run at WVU, so I don't understand why you would seem to make the argument that the offense has evolved since then when we haven't yet seen much indication of that evolution on the field, aside from the evolution that has occurred in player development. I guess my question for you would be this: do you have a better point of comparison for what Rodriguez's idea offensive configuration and carry distribution scheme would look like, because WVU was where he was head coach the longest and with the highest level of talent and player development that he has had.
September 26th, 2010 at 8:12 PM ^
I'm actually getting curious about what RR's WVU teams were really like. Yeah, I saw them in passing and I knew about how awesome their offense was. Not surprisingly, this excited about the RR hire. But I never paid attention in depth to WVU because I was too into Michigan (duh). What sort of things was RR doing that we haven't even seen yet.
September 26th, 2010 at 9:19 PM ^
I understand that. I lived in the Pittsburgh area for almost all of his tenure at WVU, so that helps to explain my attention to his system there. That, and I love the creativity of the scheme. I'm not sure that I could adequately explain what they aren't doing yet in its entirety, but one easy example would be that there has been very little incorporation of the slots in the backfield providing motion, misdirection and another option on several variations of current plays. Oregon runs a lot of this right now. At the end of the day, and this might be more of a reflection of the teams that have been played (i.e. we saw more of the playbook against Notre Dame than against anyone else), but we really haven't seen that may different plays run so far this season (believe it or not). I'm sorry that I can't give a better example of this, but the easiest answer would probably be to see if there are any 2006 or 2007 WVU games available online or to watch a bit of what Oregon is doing this year or what they did last year, since Chip Kelly learned his offensive from Rodriguez and has had his contributing players in his system long enough for them to be able to utilize the full scheme.
September 26th, 2010 at 9:21 PM ^
Your signature statement with the Michigan program statistical data is cool, but don't you have to keep changing it every week?
September 26th, 2010 at 11:07 PM ^
Just look at WVU '06 vs. Michign '10 statistically, one of the major missing factors on Michigan's stat sheet is runningback yardage. There are a lot of running schemes (for the runningback) we haven't used yet that were implemented even in the '08 Michigan offense. We haven't seen the 'speed/veer/quick/whatever' option where the QB attacks the defensive end and decides to pitch it or not. We haven't seen a lot of the runningback screens they used with Slaton (Which were very dependent on his being faster than the defense) to the edges of the field. We haven't really seen the bubble option run confidently, haven't seen the dive/speed option. Speed option reverse. And a myriad of other plays that don't stand out in my memory as highlights.
Although I would aruge that this Michigan offense has really minimal parallels to WVU's, other than the fact that the QB is running. The offenses are based on two different plays, WVU ran the read option off of a Stretch play, and Michigan runs QB belly (of sorts). There's not a whole ton of run reads being made. And without Dee's commitment, Rich Rod will continue to evolve this QB centered offense.
September 26th, 2010 at 8:57 PM ^
he would be a viable option to use in the slot.
September 26th, 2010 at 6:52 PM ^
Does anyone know if Sam Webb still has the same "gut feeling" about Dee?
September 26th, 2010 at 6:57 PM ^
Sam said nothing has changed for him. Tune in tomorrow to know more.
September 26th, 2010 at 7:31 PM ^
The only back that i could think of having the potential that dee has is fitz t. With that said we havn't really seen him play (other than those beautiful 2 plays). Shaw and smith are good, and look to be running hard, but i feel that something is missing in their running game.
September 26th, 2010 at 7:40 PM ^
was anyone else as fired up as me to see that after Toussaint ran 61 yards and then punched it in on the very next play, there was no time for smiles and celebrating????
FITZ LOOKED MAD AT THE WORLD. AND I LOVED IT.
September 26th, 2010 at 8:04 PM ^
A lot of us were a little worried that he got run down from behind. Hopefully that has to do with him not being at 100%.
September 26th, 2010 at 8:34 PM ^
hit the hole like a champ, burst through, ran 61 yards, and got caught from behind by the fastest guy on the opposing defense, and then did it again on the next play, and you're worried? Dang, if we had an RB that can routinely hit the hole and burst upfield, I don't care if he gets caught from behind every time.
Being an RB doesn't mean being the fastest.
September 26th, 2010 at 9:02 PM ^
Fitz had huge holes to go through. Not knocking the guy, just give credit where is due - Oline created that play. On the second one for the TD he jogged into the endzone. So I am with previous poster on this one, still need to see him against tougher competition to see how he manages himself.
September 26th, 2010 at 9:04 PM ^
he's routinely going to have gigantic holes to run through, IMO
September 26th, 2010 at 10:08 PM ^
I thought Fitz did a nice job of showing patience on the TD run. Some young RBs wouldn't have allowed that play to develop.
September 26th, 2010 at 8:57 PM ^
You're concerned he got caught from behind? He's getting back from a rehabilitated knee and he broke a 40 or something yard run? I believe Vincent Smith got tackled from behind by a linebacker that went around the line without being touched.
edit: oh it was 60. You're honestly concerned about that? Wow.
September 26th, 2010 at 9:25 PM ^
Additionally, Toussaint was wearing a clunky knee brace. Running backs don't wear knee braces for exactly that reason, even RBs who have previously torn ACLs.