Ben Braden: Starting RT
Being that I live in Rockford, I am very proud of this kid! Congrats to him and his hard work. Let's hope he can develop a high level of cohesiveness with the other 4 lineman!
http://www.mlive.com/wolverines/index.ssf/2014/08/michigans_brady_hoke_…
August 14th, 2014 at 3:08 PM ^
If Cole is 5% better than whoever his replacement would be, is that an upgrade that's worth burning an entire year of having a 5th-year senior starting at LT?
If Cole is better by leaps and bounds than whoever his replacement would be, then I say go for it. But true freshman offensive linemen are rarely great, so unless there's a true pile of suck behind him redshirting is incredibly valuable, because 5th-year senior linemen are rarely anything but great.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:14 PM ^
If that 5% means avoiding a game losing sack against... say MSU or ohio, would you be singing a different tune? IMO, you play the best option and recruit like crazy to keep the pipeline full of talent to replace the burned redshirts, especially considering how pivotal this year is to the program.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:19 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 3:25 PM ^
If that's what happens, I agree with you, but you don't know that until the season's over. He might be needed at any time, whether it's injury or just someone losing their helmet the play before. If he's the primary option, he's probably better off getting the garbage reps because the odds of him being needed when it counts is pretty high.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:32 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 3:29 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 3:35 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 3:41 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 3:49 PM ^
I think coaches play whoever the best player is regardless of what year that player is.
The interesting thing is one could say Hoke possibly did look to the future with the way Kalis was handled in 2012. It sounds like the coaches were 50/50 on whether to insert Kalis into the starting line up towards the end of the 2012 season. I wonder now with hindsight if they regret not making that change and have taken a firmer stance on playing the best players regardless of how old they are.
August 14th, 2014 at 6:48 PM ^
@Freddy,
I generally agree with you but not in this case because we don't have a backup tackle at this point. If Braden or Mags gets hurt (assuming they are the starters) in game 5 do you want to throw in Cole with no experience? If he is your 3rd tackle he has to play and the RS is burned. It is the same logic for those saying "don't play Shane this year, we may never need him". Well sure - but if Devin goes down you have a Russell Bellomy situation with a guy who has not played all year thrown into the fire in the middle of game 7 or whatever.
If Cole was the 4th tackle or the 5th I with you on on your logic. At this moment he might be your 2nd or at worst 3rd tackle. If he is, he is going to have his RS burnt.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:36 PM ^
Sure, that's a risk. And if redshirting him would mean that we take that sack, it would certainly suck.
But how likely is it that a tackle who is just 5% better will avoid a game-losing sack against MSU or Ohio? I'd say that's a pretty small likelihood. Meanwhile, I'd say that starting a 5th-year senior in 2018 rather than the next inexperienced young lineman coming through our system has a far greater chance to make a difference in beating MSU or Ohio then.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:21 PM ^
Let's say for arguments sake that Cole and Mags are pretty similar at LT, but that allows Mags to play LG, where he's marginally better than Bosch et al. right now. So, basically we've made the offensive line marignally better for this season. I don't think we should be comparing each of the guys on this roster to the other guys on this roster to whose better than who ONLY. We should ALSO be doing another calculation. How much do we think this line is worth when considering what the line will look like in Cole's potential 5th year. If losing him for that 5th year makes the line significantly worse and only makes this current line marginally better than it MAY not be worth it. Now, I realize there are no gurantees in life. Injuries, coaching changes, early entry to the NFL, etc. could all change that, which should also be taken into account when prioritizing importance. But, to completely disregard the future is a mistake IMO. We all see the difference in guys when that light goes on and things start to slow down and players can play aggressively and react instead of having to think. For some elite guys that happens sometime in their freshman year. Others it takes until their junior or senior year. And, we know it tends to take players longer where size matters like the lines. My point is, thinking about the future should be part of the process.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:43 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 4:15 PM ^
But you also have to remember that by then we won't have underclassmen all over our line. This should be the last season we have inexperience due to recruiting. Next year and most likely every year going forward our line should be upperclassmen and/or returning starters. So if we keep recruiting as wel as we have been, even if Cole was a 5th year, he might only be marginally better than his experienced backup.
August 14th, 2014 at 6:06 PM ^
If the line is better with Cole starting this year, then you play him. If we're just talking about needing a sub for a few snaps, that's another story. I can think of several possible downsides and the only realistic potential benefit comes in 2018.
If Cole gets injured down the road, it's certainly better if he hasn't already taken a RS.
This line can stay pretty much intact for several years. They're going to develop chemistry as a unit as well as indivdually. Those returning starters are going to be tough for anyone to unseat. Moving Magnuson to guard down the road would be far from ideal. In two seasons only Glasgow will have moved on. Kugler stepping in would be the obvious move. Things should be wide open in 2017 and Cole is looking like a two year starter. If he's already one of the top five, it's best for him and the team to let him have the job he's earned.
If he's really good, he'll be a candidate to forego that final season anyway.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:26 PM ^
Usually, I would agree. But how much do you trust our current staff to correctly and immediately identify who the best players are and what the best combo is? I'll bet my balls that at least one week 1 starter gets yanked due to poor performance before the Big Ten season starts. If that guy ends up being Cole, then you have pissed away his redshirt (unless you can conjure up a "back injury"). You have also probably wasted valuable practice reps with Magnusson at LG, instead of LT, which is where he will slide out to if Cole starts but gets benched. I just really hope that Cole doesn't get meaningful snaps this year.
August 14th, 2014 at 2:58 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 3:10 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 3:22 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 3:27 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 3:37 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 4:24 PM ^
This year, I actually think we'd be doing the 2018 season a disservice by thinking about the 2018 season instead of the 2014 season. This next year or two is hugely important for the middle-term future of Michigan football. Win now and good things will follow in the coming years.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:43 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 2:34 PM ^
I don't even live in Rockford but am still proud of the kid.
August 14th, 2014 at 2:35 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 2:44 PM ^
I'd be surprised if Bosch doesn't start.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:13 PM ^
I would also be surprised if the starting lineup has both Miller and Glasgow, especially if Glasgow is at LG. I think that Glasgow is either the starting C or the emergency option at RT. To me, the most likely left side is either Cole-Mags or Mags-Bosch. I am really hoping that it's the latter.
August 14th, 2014 at 2:39 PM ^
With all the good things I've been hearing about Ben Braden over the last few years and his great size for a RT, it seems like a very good choice. Hopefully, that will solve one piece of the OL puzzle. Now for the other 4.
August 14th, 2014 at 2:49 PM ^
If for whatever reason, Bosch doesn't see time this year, is it possible for him to RS and gain another year of eligibility? Granted, I don't see that happening, but if Cole is our LT and that pushes Mags to LG, Mags will be there for 3 more years...the same number of years of eligibility Mags (and Kalis) has. I would just hate to see such a talent only be around as career backup.
August 14th, 2014 at 2:58 PM ^
It's possible, NCAA doesn't care which year you sit. You have 5 years to use 4 years of eligibility. That said, this coaching staff seems to put eligibility management pretty low on their list of priorities, so it's unlikely. Really, it's probably good for a guy like Bosch, should he not start, to get some reps, even if it's garabage time. They'll just need to keep the pipeline filled, which they've done a great job of so far.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:08 PM ^
Thanks, and I hear ya. I just dream of a team that allows our lineman on both sides of the ball, minus possibly DE where size isn't so important, or guys that are obviously physically ready like a Charlton, to all RS and see them play in their 5th years.
August 14th, 2014 at 6:58 PM ^
I do too. The DL is to that point. Mone is now a luxury (3rd string DT) to play this year rather than a need like Pipkins was 2 years ago. Go forward there is no need to play players straight out of HS on the DL.
The OL is a different story. It has been such a cluster that a guy 6 months out of HS could be better than what we have to offer from guys 2-3 years in the program. I think this will be the last year we face that situation on the OL however unless 70% of the current players do not develop.
Bosch was a necessary casuality of the current state of UM OL last year and it sounds like Cole will be this year. But those are the only 2 guys you really lost a RS season from out of this huge mess. It is what it is. If you have a good OL coach this university gets plenty of high quality talent recruits that trading a 5th year SR in 2018 for something competent today is an ok trade in a few cases.
August 14th, 2014 at 2:53 PM ^
Even so, this staffs track record suggests we will be guessing week to week as they have had a pretty short leash in the past. Be nice to see that approach (and the need for it) a thing of the past.
Glasgows situation dictates we will have a different line up week two. I suppose he could get beat out, but I doubt it.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:01 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 3:08 PM ^
My guess is that we're looking at something like what we've expected:
LT - Magnuson
LG - Bosch (or Cole)
C - Glasgow (Miller for App State)
RG - Kalis
RT - Braden
Kalis had a comment in the Free Press about how he, Glasgow, and Magnuson have played a lot of football here and a lot of the shuffling right now is about getting guys ready in case a starter goes down.
At this point I think we've heard enough about Cole that he's clearly in the mix, whether it's for a starting position or a very quick jump off the bench kind of deal. I could see him being first off the bench for LT, which would explain wanting to get him a lot of playing time.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:12 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 3:17 PM ^
With Braden in the thick of things for a guard spot going into last year, only to drop out of the conversation completely and never be heard from again, I was really starting to get worried we were headed into a "unending practice hype that never actually materializes on the field" situation. Announcing him as a starter this early really signals that the coaching staff is comfortable with his development, both physically and with his technique.
Let's hope he can lock down that spot for the next 3 years, and we never have to build an OL out of so many question marks again.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:10 PM ^
Take this for what it's worth, but a commenter on another site who has apparently been to a few practices says Miller is the clear choice at center and is the most improved OL on the team. He then went on to say the starting OL (once Glasgow is available) will be Mags at LT, Glasgow at LG, Miller at C, Kalis at RG, and Braden at RT.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:18 PM ^
That's my take from all the "insider" buzz over the last few days, and the little pieces of practice film we've seen. In fact, I don't think I've seen a single clip of Glasgow at center since camp started.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:23 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 3:28 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 3:45 PM ^
Honestly, I'm glad it's not my call. It seems like one of those things that could go either way based on things outside of your control, with plenty of chances to look stupid no matter what you decide.
August 14th, 2014 at 4:36 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 5:22 PM ^
But I just wonder what the hell happened to Hoke saying that "Glasgow is a center", and being pretty vehement about it just a couple weeks ago...
Unless I'm just way off and mis-remembering.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:25 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 3:35 PM ^
He was saying that Miller probably benefitted more than any other OL from the switch to zone blocking because he was never going to be the type of player to simply move DT's out of the way. The best thing about that OL is every player would be in at least their third year with the program.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:29 PM ^
in my opinion, if those 5 are in fact playing the best. That line combination has the most experience and provided Miller's play has progressed to where his football smarts already seem to be (making calls, etc), the line could actually be serviceable.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:48 PM ^
I know for a fact that the coaches think much higher of Miller than his performance last year would dictate.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:49 PM ^
of Miller so I wouldn't be surprised. It would also help having the same center for game 2 as the one who went game 1.
Nuss has an advantage over us when it comes to evaluating talent, besides actually being there everday. He doesn't have the emotional baggage of having watched them real time as the Keystone cops. Unlike us he's able to be objective.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:54 PM ^
I hope for Miller's and the team's sake that Miller is very good this year. If true, this shows some combination of 1) how important age and experience are to the OL and 2) what a difference scheme makes to the OL.