yes plz
Dan Samuelson, Nebraska OL Commit, to decide between Nebraska and Michigan on 14th
January 9th, 2013 at 9:19 AM
#1
Dan Samuelson, Nebraska OL Commit, to decide between Nebraska and Michigan on 14th
Per Allen Trieu and the Twitterz.
I personally would prefer Cameron Hunt who is visiting this weekend, but not a bad position to be in with a potential backup plan for a 6th o-lineman.
January 9th, 2013 at 9:20 AM | 
Hunt
Hunt
January 9th, 2013 at 9:23 AM |
MANBALLLLLLLL
MANBALLLLLLLL
MANBALLLLLLLL
“When your team is winning, be ready to be tough, because winning can make you soft. On the other hand, when your team is losing, stick by them. Keep believing” - Bo Schembechler
January 9th, 2013 at 9:28 AM |
ADEQUATE NUMBERS OF THE
ADEQUATE NUMBERS OF THE
ADEQUATE NUMBERS ON THE OFFENSIVE LINNNNNNNNNNEEEEEEEEEEE
Seriously, if "Manball" means "more than 7 scholarship offensive linemen on the roster," Manball wins every day of the week.
January 9th, 2013 at 10:34 AM |
It's a secret, but we're
It's a secret, but we're
It's a secret, but we're going to run Wisconsin's barge formation.
Avatar is a reference to this. Go Blue!
January 9th, 2013 at 11:47 AM |
No longer a secret
No longer a secret
Way to ruin it for everyone!
As soon as i get 100 points I'm up voting and down voting ever comment on this site!!!
January 9th, 2013 at 4:08 PM |
If we're following
If we're following
If we're following Wisconsin's plan, then part of running the formation is having the defense know it's coming but pancaking them anyway.
January 9th, 2013 at 9:28 AM |
I believe Reon Dawson is also
I believe Reon Dawson is also
I believe Reon Dawson is also visiting too. Buckling up may be prudent?
January 9th, 2013 at 10:35 AM |
Dawson
Dawson
Reon is an awesome first name. It makes me smile every time I read it. I see an intergallactic Leon, but maybe I have an overactive imagination.
Twin Cities
January 9th, 2013 at 9:32 AM |
Hunt timeline
Hunt timeline
I thought I remember hearing that Hunt still had other visits set up next week. If that's the case I wonder when his decision will be made as compared to Samuelson. Has the ship sailed on the Tennessee commit who is 6'10" too?
AC-1997
January 9th, 2013 at 12:40 PM |
Skipper said Michigan is in
Skipper said Michigan is in
Skipper said Michigan is in his top five.
January 9th, 2013 at 3:39 PM |
Don't want Skipper
Don't want Skipper
I always had a thing for Marianne...
January 9th, 2013 at 9:32 AM |
Yesterday on the recruiting
Yesterday on the recruiting
Yesterday on the recruiting roundup Sam Webb seemed to feel that there was a decent chance that Michigan could sign up to 7 linemen in this class so I wouldn't assume that one commit means they are done with o linemen.
Not that I loved Rich Rod less, but that I loved Michigan more.
January 9th, 2013 at 9:36 AM |
7 seems like overkill
7 seems like overkill
I admit I know nothing, but 7 seems crazy pants. Almost like the coaches are anticipating someone moving to the d-line. But who would that be?
Thank you very little.
January 9th, 2013 at 9:49 AM |
Here are your scholarship
Here are your scholarship
Here are your scholarship offensive linemen for 2013:
Schofield
Bryant
Miller
Bars
Kalis
Magnuson
Braden
if one or more gets injured (which happens almost every year save Michigan 2012), walk-ons are playing.
Michigan needs to recruit seven since it only has three that remain from the 2009-11 classes, and those are the classes you'd expect to populate the top ends of the depth chart right now
January 9th, 2013 at 9:56 AM |
But we have 5 already in this
But we have 5 already in this
But we have 5 already in this class, that you're failing to include in your scholarship lineman list.
“When your team is winning, be ready to be tough, because winning can make you soft. On the other hand, when your team is losing, stick by them. Keep believing” - Bo Schembechler
January 9th, 2013 at 10:04 AM |
"We" don't have anything yet.
"We" don't have anything yet.
"We" don't have anything yet. Those guys haven't signed. But for the sake of argument, that means the 2014 offensive linemen are:
Bryant, Miller, Bars, Kalis, Magnuson, Braden, Dawson, Fox, LTT, Bosch, Kugler
11.
One with an ACL tear, one coming off a broken leg who was 330 before said break, and
ZERO
with any relevant playing experience at Michigan.
The coaches are simply patching over the 10 linemen that were NOT recruited between 2009-2011 that should be on the roster right now. Go have a look at other teams' rosters - they normally have about 15 scholarship offensive linemen each year. Michigan is simply catching up.
January 9th, 2013 at 10:17 AM |
Agree on the problem, but
Agree on the problem, but
Agree on the problem, but there are two ways of addressing it. You can load up in one class, but that just creates the same problem when these guys graduate.
The other way is to take 2-3 years and have slightly large classes each year to spread out the sholarships. That way you don't have the same problem in 4-5 years.
Each method has pitfalls, but it isn't crazy to prefer the second method, and people suggesting we go that route are not stupid.
January 9th, 2013 at 10:21 AM |
Exactly. I simply prefer to
Exactly. I simply prefer to
Exactly. I simply prefer to take 4 OL each season rather than 7 one year, 2 another, lather, rinse, repeat. Having 7 OL in one class would likely increase the possibility of some of those guys getting frustated with the log jam on the OL and leaving.
We ARE Michigan....COME GET SOME!!!
January 9th, 2013 at 11:54 AM |
We should be taking 4 OLs
We should be taking 4 OLs
We should be taking 4 OLs every year (with maybe an occassional year where we only take 3), whether we have a depth problem or not. Last year we only took 4 (despite ridiculous lack of depth) and according to those in the know we would have taken 7 if Garnett, diamond and Kozan all wanted in. We really needed to get at least one of those guys. In any event taking 6 (or perhaps 7 although I don't see that happening) makes perfect sense, you're sort of ignoring your second sentence, the liklihood is that the weakest of the 6 or 7 will leave and the logjam will resolve itself.
January 9th, 2013 at 5:44 PM |
I prefer not to over-recruit
I prefer not to over-recruit
I prefer not to over-recruit and hope for attrition as it can have negative consquences if the team APR (which is adversely affected by transfers) drops low enough.
We ARE Michigan....COME GET SOME!!!
January 9th, 2013 at 11:49 AM |
the reality is if you take 6
the reality is if you take 6
the reality is if you take 6 or 7, its quite likely that not all of them are around 5 years from now, the "problem" likely never occurs.
January 9th, 2013 at 10:29 AM |
but aren't you setting
but aren't you setting
but aren't you setting yourself up to have this happen again by overloading your classes? if you want 15 total and 7 are from 1 class, that only leaves 8 for 3 other classes, which means that you get some classes with only 2 or 3 linemen, which, given attrition and injuries and washouts and transfers and guys taking redshirts is pretty bad odds. seems like 6 is the most you would take, 4 is the least per class.
2013 resolution - make it onto the 2014 favorite MGoPosters post, not ironically
i wish i would have made my screen name "IT WAS THE CHAIR"
January 9th, 2013 at 11:26 AM |
The easy way to address the
The easy way to address the
The easy way to address the "problem" of 7 OL is:
Have Bosch and one other (Kugler?) play and only take 4 in the 2014 class.
January 9th, 2013 at 11:30 AM |
It is hard to anticipate who
It is hard to anticipate who
It is hard to anticipate who will need a redshirt and who will not. Raise your hand if you thought Kalis would redshirt....
Anyone?
January 9th, 2013 at 11:44 AM |
I'll raise my hand. Playing
I'll raise my hand. Playing
I'll raise my hand. Playing freshmen linemen typically means doom. Look at Taylor Lewan in 2010, he was a redshirt freshman and still had issues, namely in the form of drive killing penalties. He evolved into a dominate force, but he didn't really hit his stride until 2010 IMHO. I would have been happy with Lewan spending his first two years sipping gatorade and watching some upper classman dominate at LT.
As for 6 or 7 in a class, lineman has a high washout rate and you can't assume that all 7 are leaving en masse. If say one guy doesn't redshirt that puts him a year ahead of the others, if two guys wash out, and then a fourth guy declares for the draft early, suddenly you don't have a large glob of guys leaving at the same time. Every class we've ever recruited is smaller by the time it graduates.
January 9th, 2013 at 1:43 PM |
Yeah, but...
Yeah, but...
...how much of Lewan's getting better was from getting a year older and how much of it was from experience on the field? I'd speculate about 75% from the experience.
January 9th, 2013 at 11:50 AM |
Just what I was thinking
Just what I was thinking
Redshirt a handful of them, play the few that have real promise to start as freshmen and the set yourself up for only needing 4-5 for the following years after that. When UM gets in a position that it can afford to RS an entire class of incoming linemen, then we're doing well. Right now, can't do that. We'll HAVE to play some true freshmen, but needing them now and stocking up is not a bad thing if 2/3 of them are red shirting. Bottom line, I don't have a problem with 7 if we only play 2, max 3, next year.
The Team, The Team, The Team
January 9th, 2013 at 9:39 PM |
"can afford to RS an entire class of incoming linemen"
"can afford to RS an entire class of incoming linemen"
Didn't we just do that?
"I love him, he's a great coach, he's a great mentor, he's a great friend. He's every single thing you want a college coach to be, and he does it flawlessly." -David Molk
January 9th, 2013 at 11:58 AM |
15 isnt set in stone, if you
15 isnt set in stone, if you
15 isnt set in stone, if you get up to 17-18 in a given year so be it.
January 9th, 2013 at 11:02 AM |
And whether we have 7 lineman vs 6 will mean nothing
And whether we have 7 lineman vs 6 will mean nothing
This year or next. I'd rather we save the scholly for a lineman next year to spread things out.
January 9th, 2013 at 11:39 AM |
Graham Glasgow?
Graham Glasgow?
Anyone have further info on Graham Glasgow? He was a OL walk-on in 2011 with several offers elsewhere and was supposedly doing well according to comments last season by Lewan, however, I never noticed him on the field.
January 9th, 2013 at 11:59 AM |
He played a little.
He played a little.
http://www.mgoblue.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/graham_glasgow_765118.html
Eating is murder.
January 9th, 2013 at 12:42 PM |
He's a backup at center right
He's a backup at center right
He's a backup at center right now.
Watching him pull in the spring was ugly. I don't think he's really a viable option if we want to have a good offensive line.
January 9th, 2013 at 1:51 PM |
*shakes fist in the general
*shakes fist in the general
*shakes fist in the general direction of Tuscon, AZ*
January 9th, 2013 at 10:45 AM |
They prolly plan on not
They prolly plan on not
They prolly plan on not redshirting 1 or 2.
January 9th, 2013 at 9:38 AM |
Seven? That seems really
Seven? That seems really
Seven? That seems really excessive. Personally, I would prefer that they stick with just the five that they have right now.
Positions I feel are in greater need of another recruit before OL:
RB, WR, SDE, LB, CB
For some reason, however, the staff has not bothered to consult with me on this matter. Odd...
We ARE Michigan....COME GET SOME!!!
January 9th, 2013 at 9:52 AM |
Running back has Rawls,
Running back has Rawls,
Running back has Rawls, Hayes, Johnson, Smith, Shallman and maybe Green for one spot.
WR has Gallon, Dileo, Jackson, Darboh, Chesson, Dever and three more (maybe 4) coming in.
SDE ? Are you serious?
LB? Really?
CB has Countess, Taylor, Avery, Hollowell, Richardson and three options incoming.
So, Michigan has 1 returning starter on the O-line and only 7-8 scholarship linemen for 5 positions and you think OTHER spots need more numbers? Shamone.
January 9th, 2013 at 10:18 AM |
Did you really need to be an
Did you really need to be an
Did you really need to be an ass in your response? Disagree? Fine, list your reasons for doing so but try to be a little more respectful in the future, please.
My reasoning for stating my opinion: UM landed 4 very good OL in the 2012 class and currently has 5 highly rated OL in the 2013 class. They are very likely going to be able to field their entire starting 5 OL from the 9 guys currently in the 2012-2013 classes and those guys will probably be good to excellent.
Meanwhile, the players UM currently has on the roster or are in the 2013 class at RB, WR and CB do not inspire me with a lot of confidence. There are rumors that a couple of the recent LB commits may have career ending injuries and UM has no one in the 2013 class to fill the SDE position unless the coaches are lying to Shallman and intend to play him at SDE.
We ARE Michigan....COME GET SOME!!!
January 9th, 2013 at 11:40 AM |
He's always been an ass but
He's always been an ass but
He's always been an ass but what he posted was dead on. You need to grow a pair and defend your opinion in the future instead of whining.
Omnia mutantur nos et mutamur in illis.
January 9th, 2013 at 11:55 AM |
Forreals man
Forreals man
Forreals. That was a pretty benign and accurate response.
January 9th, 2013 at 5:49 PM |
Did you fail to read the rest
Did you fail to read the rest
Did you fail to read the rest of my response? I did supply my reasoning for my original post and you are just as much of an ass as he is based on your response.
Are you people this rude in real life or are you just "internet tough guys"? I would think anyone who behaves in such an uncivil manner would routinely get their ass whipped if they ever "grew a pair" and talked to people like this face-to-face.
We ARE Michigan....COME GET SOME!!!
January 10th, 2013 at 12:00 AM |
Relax
Relax
Relax man. We're all in your corner.
January 9th, 2013 at 10:11 AM |
Rumor is we could be losing 2
Rumor is we could be losing 2
Rumor is we could be losing 2 linebackers to injury. Then mike jones, Hawthorne maybe cam Gordon. That leaves Ryan, Morgan, Ross, bolden and Rjs as the only returning players with exp. plus 2 incoming frosh. Also jake Ryan could be gone after next season. IMO it would be wise to take 1 more and plan for the worst
Bears Beets Battlestar Galactica
January 9th, 2013 at 4:17 PM |
RJS doesn't really have
RJS doesn't really have
RJS doesn't really have experience. I don't really count special teams as actual experience.
Greetings from Bolivia.
"It's special how the real true people hang together. And if you don't support the program you're not a true Michigan guy. It's that simple." - Gary Moeller
January 9th, 2013 at 7:35 PM |
I think there's something to
I think there's something to
I think there's something to be said for being out on the field and getting a sense for how hard people hit, how fast they run, getting the butterflies out, etc. It's obviously not the same as lining up at middle linebacker, making the read, taking on a fullback, etc., but it's something.
January 9th, 2013 at 3:06 PM |
Still not sure how signing 7 this year helps
Still not sure how signing 7 this year helps
If you sgn one more linemen it isn't like they are going to play as a true freshman. Even Kyle Kalis the most "college" ready guy was not going to play. A walkon would be more likely to play than a true freshman. All signing 7 linemen set you up to do is having 11 Oline leaving within 2 years of each other four years from now. I don't see how signing an extra linemen is relevant when discussing next years depth.
January 9th, 2013 at 11:37 AM |
It does seem excessive
It does seem excessive
But, I get the need to correct for the paucity of linemen recruited in the RR era.
More than that, here's what I think could be happening. Line positions are notoriously difficult to project. But with some of the skill positions, you have a better sense of what you're getting. If Michigan had the chance to sign Treadwell, or Green, or Rueben Foster, I would take them ahead of another lineman. But if Michigan can add another four star lineman instead of a CB or RB or LB they're somewhat "meh" about, I'd go with the lineman.
To put this another way: at this point, take the best athlete available. The tweak on this is that you don't fully know who will pan out to be the best linemen, so until we are at a full complement (14 - 16 linemen on the roster,) it makes sense to over-recruit. Especially because, again, you can't be sure who is really going to work out on the line.
"It does not matter how many times you get knocked down, but how many times you get up." Vince Lombardi
January 9th, 2013 at 9:40 AM |
Great Googly Moogly
Great Googly Moogly
that's a lot of beef for one year. I would imagine there comes a point where there is a little over kill.
Wasting away in Ohio, a Wolverine in a sea of red and grey
January 9th, 2013 at 9:46 AM |
Seven! Seven?
Seven! Seven?
"Seven linemen twirling on a branch, eating lots of sunflowers on my uncles ranch. You know that old children's tale from the sea!"
If there taking seven than they may no something we don't yet.
One man...Goodbye....Hello Heisman
January 9th, 2013 at 11:04 AM |
I'm talking Brie, your talking Gorgonzola
I'm talking Brie, your talking Gorgonzola
6 is the number.
Hunt is visiting this weekend. Basically they are giving Hunt first option.
neoavatara.com/blog