Carvin Johnson to Deep Safety
http://michigan.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1145679
Something small that I just saw that must have slipped through the cracks. I am not sure if this means anything about tomorrow but Rivals is saying Carvin Johnson moved to FS and Cam Gordon is working spur.
Other small note from article: Marvin Robinson could play LB in some Nickel situations.
October 29th, 2010 at 11:52 PM ^
In the games against MSU, Iowa, BGSU, and Notre Dame, Cameron Gordon's skills/speed at free safety have been exposed. That's four out of seven games.
The other three were UConn (who couldn't catch a damn thing), UMass, and Indiana (who threw for 480 yards).
October 29th, 2010 at 8:34 PM ^
I've noticed a couple people ask you who should have been FS instead of Cam Gordon. I've also noticed you studiously avoid answering that question. I wonder if we wandered over to Touch The Boner whether we would find a post where you actually offer an alternative to Cam Gordon. Oh sure, now you say Carvin Johnson should have been the guy, but...really? You've been saying all along that a true freshman should have started FS three weeks after he arrived on campus? I'd be curious to see where you said that.
(Also, I think that would have been a stupid idea- starting a true freshman with zero game experience and only a few weeks of practice is FAR worse than starting a true freshman with several games of experience and months of practice. That you can't see or admit this is really quite telling.)
Guys that are so quick to criticize and are noticeably slow to suggest are guys that are just generally not very helpful or productive. Just an observation.
October 29th, 2010 at 10:30 PM ^
Well, if Cam Gordon was at Spur or Bandit instead of FS for the UConn game, then Emilien starts and is probably still with the team. Who knows how that would have turned out. You could say that he couldn't beat out Gordon, but Demens couldn't beat Ezeh either and look how that turned out. If Emilien didn't work out and Carvin Johnson had been playing a position that better suited his body build, he would be ready to take over right now with another 8 weeks of practice.
October 29th, 2010 at 11:57 PM ^
I never said that Carvin Johnson should be starting at FS. You're putting words in my mouth. However, I did say that he should be playing Bandit or FS.
In my opinion, Woolfolk should have been playing FS all along. The team was better in 2009 when he was at FS than it was when he was CB.
I'm sorry it took me so long to answer one of the 50 or 60 responses to my posts in a timely fashion. I didn't know my lack of a response for a few hours would cause you to question my integrity so much. It's not like I have other things to do on Friday nights...
October 30th, 2010 at 12:05 PM ^
I've always assumed that you were entirely capable of posting while you were doing pretty much anything.
November 2nd, 2010 at 8:45 AM ^
You said that Woolfolk should start at FS. How can he do that being out for the season? Please, for s**** and giggles, state who should have been starting? You know, with the players who have been available.
October 29th, 2010 at 3:17 PM ^
Why didn't Coach Carr start Tom Brady earlier?-- Because he won a national championship with Brian Griese.
Why didn't Bo adjust his style of play before he lost his 6,7 or 8th Rose Bowl?-- Because he was Bo. That was his style of play, that's what his team was most successful playing.
Why didn't Moeller attend some AA classes?-- Because the first step is admitting you're an alcoholic.
October 29th, 2010 at 3:37 PM ^
I was just trying to point out the fact that when something happens after the fact, it is easy to be "spot on".
October 29th, 2010 at 2:42 PM ^
I didn't call them idiots. They're certainly not idiots.
I just don't understand what they're thinking. Obviously they've seen more and seen different things than me, but obvious things should be obvious.
October 29th, 2010 at 3:53 PM ^
Isn't it possible that Coach Rod has been hands off the defense (right or wrong) until recently? Things haven't been progressing on D so now he's looking to get more involved and move some players around. Also, I think our D would look a little different if most of our freshman secondary had come in in January rather than August.
October 29th, 2010 at 11:58 PM ^
Yeah, it's possible. I don't know whether it's true or not, but it's possible.
October 29th, 2010 at 5:26 PM ^
And I don't like peanut butter-covered steak, but I didn't see either of those in this thread. What's with all the straw man arguments lately?
October 29th, 2010 at 2:24 PM ^
I agree, but they also see more than we do...
It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.
October 29th, 2010 at 4:18 PM ^
with young kids and learning about them while they're redshirts and scout-teaming it and not thrown into the fire in the public eye. When they have to get them on the field right away, they may have to weigh the talent and smarts and get the kids on the field they deem as readier to play, whether it's their ideal position or the team's position of need. And as they see what individual kids take to, what their strengths and weaknesses are, what their bodies can do and their brains can pick up, then they bring in the new, now readier, kids, make adjustments with those already playing, and work toward getting the right mix with what they have. Sounds promising to me. And the bye week seems the best time.
October 29th, 2010 at 2:27 PM ^
Right. I'm sitting at a computer.
And yet I still knew that Cam Gordon was too slow to play FS. Apparently the coaches realize that now, too, because they're moving him around.
October 29th, 2010 at 2:43 PM ^
So who would you have had play FS to start the season? Carvin or Vinopal, who had a few weeks worth of practice?
<br>
October 29th, 2010 at 4:40 PM ^
that mangus has seemingly been avoiding. the free safety options through spring practices and the summer were Cam Gordon, Vlad Emilien (possibly slower than Gordon), Vinopal (not on campus yet), and Johnson (not on campus yet). and woolfolk of course. i don't really see a better option.
7 games in is a different story, as i assume carvin and vinopal have developed some.
October 30th, 2010 at 12:02 AM ^
Well, in my perfect scenario, Woolfolk would have been playing FS. Who knows? Maybe if he were playing FS, he wouldn't have broken his ankle. But that's a big "if" so I'm not counting on that to be true.
Still...it makes you wonder.
Anyway, I think Emilien would have been perhaps just as good of an option as Gordon. Maybe Johnson. Maybe Vinopal. The fact is, beyond Troy Woolfolk, our FS this year was bound to suck, anyway.
October 30th, 2010 at 11:09 AM ^
So you give a big "I told you so," but you don't really have an answer yourself. There was really no other option at FS other than Cam to start the season, unless the coaches wanted to start Vinopal or Carvin who both were incoming freshman with only a few weeks of practice under their belt.
Now the coaches must think Carvin and/or Vinopal have enough coaching behind them to give them a shot at starting FS. Carvin started at Spur at the beginning of the season, but FS is an entirely different beast.
October 30th, 2010 at 12:10 PM ^
No, I gave an answer elsewhere in the thread.
First of all, Woolfolk should have been the FS heading into summer camp.
Secondly, there were other options at FS, including Emilien, Vinopal, and Carvin Johnson. Emilien isn't exactly fast, but he had more experience than Cam Gordon and he couldn't have been much - if any - slower.
October 29th, 2010 at 1:33 PM ^
Isn't there at least one more dimension? Aren't they forced to pick the guy that combines both the physical attributes that you mention with the mental acuity to handle the position as well? What I mean is, maybe X isn't the best fit at this position, but we're looking at 5 or 6 freshman for a couple spots and X is the most advanced in other aspects at this point in time so we're going to put him on the field because we think he can handle the job and would give us the best chance to win. It's more than a physical fit, right? And, as the freshmen pick up the defense, doesn't it make sense that they can begin to move players to their more natural positions?
I think you're probably right about where kids fit. I'm just saying that it might be incorrect to say the coaches didn't realize it.
October 29th, 2010 at 4:24 PM ^
before I answered someone above in the much the same vein. At least now I know what I was trying to say.
October 29th, 2010 at 1:36 PM ^
Do you think that maybe with the deep safety position they wanted someone who at least had a spring to practice it? Maybe these freshman have developed enough now that they've earned the trust of the coaching staff.
As for Patterson, that boggles my mind. That to me seems like they put Segasse behind Banks bc they banked on MM not getting hurt or tired....ever
October 29th, 2010 at 1:37 PM ^
Not sure on some of them, but I was waiting on this one concerning Cam. You have to realize what this team looked like in March. All the freshmen were not enrolled, Vlad was not proving to be and option, neither was Mike Williams. The coaches had to get somebody ready to play deep safety when the fall came. Who would you have liked that person to be?
Many of these postion decisions may have been made out of dire situations. Moving forward this will be the last time hopefully for a while that we will not have to look at positions devoid of competition. Finally in 2011, every position on the team will have competition for the starting spot from at least 2 scholarship players that are not true freshmen. The 1st time since RR has been here that has been in place. That will help everywhere. More live drilling, more live tackling, more everything because we now have depth everywhere and will be better prepared to absorb an injury.
October 30th, 2010 at 12:03 AM ^
The coaches had to get somebody ready to play deep safety when the fall came. Who would you have liked that person to be?
Troy Woolfolk.
October 30th, 2010 at 10:55 AM ^
And who would you have taking his spot at corner?
October 30th, 2010 at 12:12 PM ^
Ummm...maybe the people who are taking his spot now?
Look, we were going to suck at whatever position Woolfolk wouldn't be playing. So what position is more important - free safety or cornerback? Most football-minded people would tell you that safety play is more important than cornerback play.
October 29th, 2010 at 1:44 PM ^
maybe the coaches just didn't want two true freshmen at FS to start the year? It is possible that neither Carvin or Vinopal learned the entire defensive playbook until now so we needed someone with "experience" at FS. I do agree about the Sagesse thing though, that is very strange.
October 29th, 2010 at 1:47 PM ^
The obvious answer is that you know more about Michigan recruits and players than anyone else, and that you should be coaching this team.
October 29th, 2010 at 2:08 PM ^
You're the only one asserting that.
October 29th, 2010 at 2:16 PM ^
is getting very tiresome. Why do so many on this site feel the need to be ultimate defenders of this coaching staff? They do make mistakes, and we are able to question them. Its not as if RichRod has had a winning record at Michigan yet, so he could make some improvements. If we aren't going to question coaching decisions and play calling, then why even have a blog about Michigan football. Lets just all agree the coaches don't make mistakes, they know all, and just enjoy the games.
October 29th, 2010 at 2:20 PM ^
It's not about the coaches, but the other posters?
October 29th, 2010 at 3:02 PM ^
I like how these responses essentially boil down to...
"Well, now the coaches are doing what you - and others - have been suggesting all along. So even though you were right, since you have the audacity to actually point it out, you're an ass!"
Okay. I'm fine with that.
October 29th, 2010 at 3:14 PM ^
As soon as Denard moves to WR, all of your prognostications will be fact.
My God, if you aren't the greatest thing . Ever.
October 30th, 2010 at 12:06 AM ^
Go ahead and try to find a post where I said Denard Robinson should be playing wide receiver right now.
I remember a time when you said that you had a man crush on Justin Bieber and that your favorite TV show was "Queer Eye for a Straight Guy."
See, I can make stuff up, too.
October 30th, 2010 at 12:40 AM ^
October 30th, 2010 at 12:52 AM ^
I apologize for the error in judgment.
October 30th, 2010 at 10:59 AM ^
I'm fucking lazy, so there's no way in hell I'm going back to look it up; but are you really suggesting that you never said Denard would never make it as QB and that he'd be better served to just switch positions this year?
You really do have a problem admitting when you're wrong, I'm sure you've never heard that before though.
October 30th, 2010 at 12:16 PM ^
but are you really suggesting that you never said Denard would never make it as QB and that he'd be better served to just switch positions this year?
Yes, I'm suggesting that because it's the 100% truth. I'm not stupid enough to think that Michigan's quarterback depth chart should consist of Tate Forcier and true freshman Devin Gardner. I said repeatedly that Denard Robinson should remain at QB through 2010, and his position should be re-evaluated after his sophomore season. With his success at QB this year, I'd say he'll remain at that position beyond this season.
Maybe I do have a problem admitting when I'm wrong, but that's irrelevant in a conversation when I'm actually...you know...right.
October 29th, 2010 at 4:21 PM ^
I'm with you Big Daddy Magnus. Succinct summation of the responses.
October 29th, 2010 at 4:42 PM ^
Don't forget that you - and others - were only making such assertions back then because of your 20/20 hindsight.
October 30th, 2010 at 12:07 AM ^
Hindsight always comes in handy when predicting the future.
October 29th, 2010 at 5:35 PM ^
When Magnus offers up 10-20 suggestions a week, and 8 week laters one of the coaches "follows" his advice, apparently that means MAGNUS WAS RIGHT ALL ALONG.
(Cue Magnus talking about Brandon Minor, and conveniently forgetting his advice on Denard)
October 29th, 2010 at 11:45 PM ^
You mean my advice on Denard where I suggested that he remain at quarterback at least through 2010 because of the lack of depth? I think you're lumping me in with the crew that suggested he switch to WR for this season. I was never in that group of thinkers.
Try again.
October 30th, 2010 at 11:01 AM ^
King of parsing.
October 30th, 2010 at 12:18 PM ^
I'm still waiting for you to tell me where I've been wrong about this...
...and waiting...
...and waiting...
October 29th, 2010 at 1:55 PM ^
Offseason experimentation is one thing, but so many people switching positions midseason just makes the staff look appear incompetant. Overall, they're obviously not, but in terms of assessing the approrpiate positions for available skillsets - the question remains.
To add to the above, Teric Jones and James Rodgers moving back and forth and then back again. Rogers was justifiable, based on need, but Jones never looked remotely competant in the secondary. Leaves you with a "what were they thinking?" feeling.
I'm glad they're not totally stubborn. If guys are a better fit elsewhere, move them. The issue I have is with the identification of ability from the outset. Plenty of people questioned the the initial positioning of these guys, but trusted the coaches. That doubt has been vindicated.
On the plus side, if everyone ends up in the right spot (as it now appears) we'll be in better shape.
October 29th, 2010 at 3:58 PM ^
Why are you giving examples of 5th string players? If a player is that far down the depth start why not move him around to see if they can contribute somewhere. The only reason either player will see any playing time this weekend is because we have 4 injured or transfered RB's right now and any even worse situation with our DB's.
The only really big move that may impact this season seems to be Carvin to FS. Maybe he has gotten a few reps there throughout the season or maybe he is a fast learner. In any case I doubt a true freshman who just started practicing at FS will start. But if we are in a blowout why not see what he can do?
October 29th, 2010 at 4:11 PM ^
Teric Jones had neither the size nor the athleticism to be a DB. This was obvious to amateur observers within a few plays against MAC backups (if not by reading his recruiting profile).
Furthermore, RR has stated that Teric Jones may play this week. Smith and Hopkins are healthy. Shaw is reportedly ready to go. Cox may be dinged but is not on the injury report. If Jones plays, its not out of screaming necessity (like Rogers).
Regardless of impact, it speaks to the coaches being either poor evaluators of this sort of thing or indecisive. To the team's detriment.
October 29th, 2010 at 4:29 PM ^
Teric Jones is an awful example. Our db's have been decimated the last few years and we desperately needed some bodies back there.
This is is recruiting profile from Scout:
Has outstanding speed and acceleration. Is a shifty elusive runner who can make people miss and run away from defenders in the open field. Has great hands and the versatility to be used in a variety of roles. Has good strength pound for pound and a solid build, but still needs to add some size. Has not carried the load, so must prove he has the durability to carry the ball extensively. Also must show he is more than a home run hitter.
Sounds like someone who if he had the mindset of a defensive player has the physical profile of a CB. Considering our lack of speed and quickness of our CB's the last few years, moving a 5th or 6th string RB in 2009 to CB doesn't sound like a bad idea in hindsight. Now from on field performance last year is seems Teric wasn't a natural at the position or just didn't have the mindset for. But is was worth a try and I hope our coaches continue to move guys around who are in an area of depth to areas that lack depth if they think they can contribute. If those moves don't always work out that's not an indictment of the coaches at all.