Drake Johnson What the ?

Submitted by BornSinner on
It takes Green and Smith to both get injured for Johnson to even get significant snaps... Makes me think whether these coaches would even give him a shot if the other two were healthy.. Granted it is Indiana and it is great seeing some awesome running. Cheers.
MGoBoard

ifis

November 1st, 2014 at 7:25 PM ^

Devin Funchess, Jake Ryan, Frank Clark, the Glasgow bros., Willie Henry, Jehu Chesson, and maybe Drake Johnson.  Everytime one of them starts, it necessarily means that a 4/5 star does not and is a 'bust.'  I am not saying Hoke is the greatest coach in the world, but a) he is not as bad as everyone makes him out to be and b) even if he is, just let it goooooooo...... 

Joined: 12/07/2011

MGoPoints: 1853

Don

November 1st, 2014 at 6:37 PM ^

Caveats about the opponent aside, Johnson seems to have a burst that we've been missing.

Makes me wonder about guys like Pipkins who are riding the bench.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 148262

Reader71

November 2nd, 2014 at 9:02 AM ^

Admittedly not inside info: Glasgow earned the starting position and has shown why. He has played well for us all year. This suggests that whoever controls the DL rotation knows something about talent evaluation. It also suggests that Pipkins is probably not better than Glasgow, as it is just plain herd to play better.

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 22968

buckeyekiller1

November 1st, 2014 at 6:38 PM ^

He looks much more explosive to the hole and once he's through it. I know it's Indiana, but he made a few cuts and made it through a few holes that neither Green nor Smith would've.

Joined: 10/04/2010

MGoPoints: 2939

Bodogblog

November 1st, 2014 at 6:38 PM ^

What the hell are you talking about? Not everything has to be shoehorned into a "derp coaches" narrative. Hoke has been mentioning Drake for two years now and been dismissed as motivational talk. He's healthy now and looks damn good. Hoke appears to have been right about him.

Joined: 06/08/2010

MGoPoints: 26674

Bodogblog

November 1st, 2014 at 7:57 PM ^

1. Hoke recruits kid nobody wants 2. Hoke talks up kid nobody in fan base wants 3. Kid is hurt, season over 4. Hoke again talks up kid 6. Fan base Really does not want to fucking hear about him, for realz 7. Kid misses time in Fall camp, passed over by touted recruits 8. Kid nobody but Hoke wanted plays great against Indiana 9. mgoblog mob: "Hoke being right about him is not the issue" 10. profit

Joined: 06/08/2010

MGoPoints: 26674

BornSinner

November 1st, 2014 at 9:13 PM ^

It takes 9 games into the season to figure this out? Hoke doesn't base his decisions off of the fan base. 

If the Green and Smith were not injured, would we see Johnson play AT ALL? That is what I am getting at here. 

If the kid is as good as Hoke keeps saying he is why does it take 9 games? Is he being star struck with his 5 and 4 star guys in Green or Smith? Is it being loyal to a fault? What's the deal here? 

It is not like Johnson tore is ACL again thats keeping him out for so long. What gives? 

So let's relax a little bit and discuss what could be the reasoning. I'm happy for the win and the kid. 

Joined: 09/20/2014

MGoPoints: 14672

Reader71

November 1st, 2014 at 9:24 PM ^

Why not? According to ESPN, Green was running for 5.7 YPC before his injury. Smith is at 4.9. There has been no push to give Johnson more carries because the two primary backs have been OK. Green goes down, Johnson is given a shot, and he had a good game. Also, Indiana. I hope Johnson turns into the next great Michigan back, but the reaction on here has been ridiculous.

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 22968

pescadero

November 2nd, 2014 at 7:35 AM ^

According to ESPN, Green was running for 5.7 YPC before his injury. Smith is at 4.9.

 

Yes.

 

Also note, that prior to Indiana Drake Johnson was averaging 8 YPC. The Indiana game DROPPED his season average to 7.6YPC.

 

the two primary backs have been OK.

 

Except they haven't. At all.

 

 

Joined: 03/28/2013

MGoPoints: 12004

pescadero

November 2nd, 2014 at 9:40 AM ^

As a member of the Michigan faculty, you should be familiar with concepts like sample size. 

 

I'm not faculty.

 

...and as someone very familiar with sample size, NONE of our running backs has had enough carries for a statistically relevant sample. Green and Smith's YPC are basically just as "sample size" limited as Johnson.

 

And if YPC of 5.7 and 4.9 do not match your definition of OK, I dont know what might.

 

I'd say looking at YPC absent a bunch of other data says absolutely nothing about whether a back is any good. 

Joined: 03/28/2013

MGoPoints: 12004

Reader71

November 2nd, 2014 at 10:09 AM ^

Sorry, thought you ere faculty. In any event, "Green and Smith's YPC are basically just as "sample size" limited as Johnson," is absolute nonsense. Green - 82 carries Smith - 77 carries Johnson - 21 carries, 5 before yesterday's game. We disagree a lot, but you've always made good points. This one is horse shit. The other two backs have had 4x more carries, many of them coming against non-Indiana. The next one is pretty good, though. YPC doesn't tell the whole story, of course. But when you are running for 5.7 and 4.9, you are running OK. Nothing more, but I never claimed that.

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 22968

pescadero

November 2nd, 2014 at 2:32 PM ^

The other two backs have had 4x more carries, many of them coming against non-Indiana.

 
Yes - the sample size for the other backs is larger... but STILL insufficient. With samples that small, the confidence interval will swamp any useful data.
 
 
But when you are running for 5.7 and 4.9, you are running OK. 

When you're running for those numbers, over a large sample size (at least 200+ carries), against top 50 defenses - you're OK.

Joined: 03/28/2013

MGoPoints: 12004

GoBLUinTX

November 2nd, 2014 at 11:17 AM ^

of using Hayes on third down seemed to be broken yesterday.  In the first half Hayes was used as a RB on 1st down as much as Smith was used on third down.  I also saw Johnson come in on third down to block, he had no 3rd down runs.  All of which is a good thing, there is nothing worse for a struggling offense than to tell the other side what they're going to do.

Joined: 12/02/2013

MGoPoints: 5895

Yeoman

November 2nd, 2014 at 11:52 AM ^

...since one of the reasons Johnson was touted so highly in 2013 was because he was a superior pass blocker--the best on the team IIRC, though obviously Hayes has really come on in the season and a half since.

Joined: 06/08/2011

MGoPoints: 21390

MGlobules

November 2nd, 2014 at 10:33 AM ^

than that dumb comment, but to cut to the chase, let me turn the tables on the argument: do you think that the o-line has not progressed? Of course not. I'm hardly arguing that Johnson isn't good, or hasn't belonged out there. (In fact, I'm an A2 native, and have been hoping that he would become a star.) I'm just arguing that these things--an improved oline and Johson's increasingly good running (which Brady has commented on) likely go together, which most people wouldn't dispute.

Joined: 11/17/2008

MGoPoints: 47523