Great Story on O'Korn, Talking to His Parents

Submitted by BursleyHall82 on

Angelique did a great story on John O'Korn in the Detroit News today, primarily talking to his parents. Talks a lot about his family, his faith and his background. I CAN'T WAIT FOR THIS KID.

“He had the right attitude coming in — ‘This isn’t taking a year off, this is a year to prepare.’ He’s done well and Michigan demands that. That’s not something you really have a choice, but mentally this was where you decide, ‘Am I going to go through the motions or put myself in position to get serious?’”

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/sports/college/university-michigan/201…

MGoBoard
Football

mgobleu

February 27th, 2016 at 11:17 AM ^

If he can use Jake Rudock's knowledge and approach and adapt it to that cannon of his, look out folks. I do expect Speight to take a step up too with the experience he got. I think we're going to end up with 2 or 3 QB's ranging from quite competent to quite good. /popcorn.gif

Joined: 07/02/2008

MGoPoints: 38428

UMProud

February 27th, 2016 at 11:17 AM ^

Great kid I'm really looking forward to seeing him play.

I think he has the potential to go down in Michigan history as one of the best QBs we've ever had...having the QB Whisperer as his coach won't hurt his chances either.

Joined: 12/18/2014

MGoPoints: 2705

WolvinLA2

February 27th, 2016 at 11:41 AM ^

Based on my understanding of the word, I'm having a hard time thinking of a quality or characteristic that is tangible. An "arm" is tangible, but "arm strength" is not. I think the word "intangible" is one of the most misused words in sports, along with "humbled." "I'm very humbled to be named the best player in the country." I think this mostly has to do with the fact that up until blogs existed, 95% of the people involved in sports were fucking stupid.

Joined: 11/13/2009

MGoPoints: 58191

WolvinLA2

February 27th, 2016 at 1:19 PM ^

Tangible does not mean measurable though. If we used "immeasurables" in place of "intangibles" then the word would make sense. The two definitions of intangible given by dictionary.com say: 1. Capable of being touched 2. Real or actual, vs imaginary Based on that, characteristics are either all intangible (using the first definition, since no characteristic is capable of being touched) or all tangible (using the second definition). I've always used definition 1 as my understanding of the word, but in either case this word is a poor choice for sports abilities. I like using words like measurable to distinguish, to avoid looking like someone who doesn't know what words mean.

Joined: 11/13/2009

MGoPoints: 58191

Rodriguesqe

February 27th, 2016 at 1:31 PM ^

But what about definition # 3?

  • definite; not vague or elusive

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/tangible

Arm strength is as definite as height. The word is used correctly in this sense, IMO.

"Chomping at the bit" also, from the article which I had to skip over to get to 'physical intangibles', is not though.

I must be in a mood because usually I ignore these things.

Joined: 12/29/2013

MGoPoints: 4222

WolvinLA2

February 27th, 2016 at 1:38 PM ^

Honestly, on mine it only shows two definitions. But even using that third definition and I'm still not totally sold. I don't think a quality can be tangible. I just think there are better words to use. I agree with "chomping at the bit." I've stopped correcting people on that one because it's so widely overused that people don't even believe me. Our society is so dumb that when enough people misuse words or phrases they've actually changed meaning. When smart people use them correctly, more people think they're the ones who are saying it incorrectly.

Joined: 11/13/2009

MGoPoints: 58191

Starko

February 27th, 2016 at 1:59 PM ^

I think he would say it's because you have too narrow a view of language. Like people who get bent out of shape over the use of literally to mean figuratively. You have a point, but ultimately, there is a contemporary use of intangibles that does convey meaning to most of us (dare I say, even you), and this probably ain't the forum to take a stand on it.

Joined: 10/08/2008

MGoPoints: 782

WolvinLA2

February 27th, 2016 at 2:14 PM ^

That's a fair point, and it's possible I'm overly picky on the use of certain words (I also get upset about literally). I'm really not taking a stand as much as having a discussion. Either way, I think calling me ignorant is going a bit far. I'm not even sure that's a contemporary use of the word intangibles, since I've never heard it used that way outside of sports.

Joined: 11/13/2009

MGoPoints: 58191

WolvinLA2

February 27th, 2016 at 1:14 PM ^

I'm not suggesting he doesn't have talent or a ton of potential. But he came to Michigan with a lot to work on. The offense he played in had far fewer reads than he'll have at Michigan and Brian has mentioned multiple times how he needs to reel in his "gunslinger" tendencies. I think he'll be good, but to say he's not a bit of a project still is being optimistic.

Joined: 11/13/2009

MGoPoints: 58191

bacon

February 27th, 2016 at 12:07 PM ^

I'm in no way advocating for Shane Morris with this statement, but did I miss something with regards to why everyone thinks O'Korn will be the guy come fall? I know there were rumors about O'Korn being great in practice and Shane didn't have a great experience in games with Hoke, but Harbaugh red-shirted Morris last year, presumably to give him a chance to compete this year and next for the starting job. He could have easily just told him to transfer and taken the extra scholarship. I think his chances can't be as low as people think (at least going into spring) or else he'd be out of here.

Joined: 01/04/2009

MGoPoints: 18646

not TOM BRADY

February 27th, 2016 at 12:22 PM ^

Because he has played before at a high level. Nobody needs to revisit the Morris thing he is third on the depth chart. He also now has a year of coaching from Harbaugh. And many have reported he looked very good according to sources. Your question really should be is everyone underestimating Spieght not Morris.

Joined: 06/02/2012

MGoPoints: 30458

schreibee

February 27th, 2016 at 12:40 PM ^

First and foremost it indicates O'Korn wasn't elgible to play in 2015.

And as for the poster who asked why we all assume O'Korn beats out Shane (or Speight, Malzone, Peters...) for the starting job in '16, he answered his own question about 3 times in his post:

"Reports" were that O'Korn looked great, and would've been starting over Rudock if he were elgible to. After seeing how Rudock performed in most of our final stretch of games and in the Bowl, I think it would be unreasonable to assume anyone else starts.

If you're into, like, the whole assuming thing...

Joined: 11/02/2009

MGoPoints: 21159

bacon

February 27th, 2016 at 2:28 PM ^

As I said, I'm not trying to revive the debate, I'm just shocked that it's taken as almost fact that it will be O'Korn as starter (who I think is also probably the more likely candidate). During one of the games last year the announcers were talking about how Morris had asked Harbaugh to redshirt last year if Rudock started and Harbaugh obliged even when it meant playing Speight in games when Rudock was hurt. This could be to preserve his eligibility, but he loses a year when transferring and if he'd transferred last summer he could have been playing this year somewhere else with 2 years of eligibility (maybe I'm missing something about the transfer process). Seems odd to stay and sit behind someone if it's a forgone conclusion O'Korn is the clear starter. Maybe Shane's plan is to hope that O'Korn is so good he goes pro after this year and Shane competes for the job as a RS senior, but it seems strange. Edit, in retrospect I think I'm having a hard time reading what I said and saying I'm not trying to revive the debate. I'm more interested in what happened to the very vocal pro-Shane group.

Joined: 01/04/2009

MGoPoints: 18646

Farnn

February 27th, 2016 at 12:32 PM ^

Could have something to do with the fact that Morris has been utterly terrible every time on the field at Michigan.  His career stats are 49%, 4.47 ypa, 0 TDs, 5 INTs.  Yes, the coaches were terrible then, but if he hadn't been a highly rated recruit 4 years ago people would be suggesting he should be kindly asked to leave and open up a scholarship.  And just for comparison, here are O'Korn's stats from the year he was benched:  52%, 5.5 ypa, 6 TD, 8 INT.  Not great but a lot better than Morris when you also look at the promise he showed as a freshman.

Joined: 07/07/2008

MGoPoints: 12788

Dr. Emil Shuffhausen

February 27th, 2016 at 12:44 PM ^

I was wondering a bit about O'Korn's personality and

background other than lighting it up for Houston

as a Freshman.

Glad to read he comes from great parents and has

a good head on his shoulders.  I wish him all

the best of luck.

Joined: 11/10/2013

MGoPoints: 724

1WhoStayed

February 27th, 2016 at 2:37 PM ^

I like your enthusiasm, but I don't see why you think future QBs will be in a better position than O'Korn.

It seems to me that O'Korn will have 3 years learning under Harbaugh. IMHO, his time here will be the equivalent of a stud who comes in and redshirts, plays 2 years and then goes pro.

When you add the fact that O'Korn has 1 year+ of college ball under his belt, that should raise the bar even more. (i.e. He's not an unproven commodity playing against HS kids.)

Assuming he is the starter, we should expect big things because Harbaugh "recruited" him after seeing him at Houston. That seems like a huge advantage to me over getting a HS recruit.

So I don't see looking past next year for stellar QB play. It starts now. Regardless of who wins the QB competition - injury notwithstanding. (...spit over left shoulder...flick boogie into my wifes side of the bed...turn counter clockwise twice on 1 leg...)

Joined: 09/07/2015

MGoPoints: 12097

The Oracle

February 27th, 2016 at 1:14 PM ^

I hope O'Korn turns out to be as good as advertised, because QB play will be the key to the whole season. We all saw what a difference it made when good Rudock showed up mid-way through the season. Good Rudock would've meant a win against Utah and the MSU game wouldn't have been close enough for a botched punt to have made any difference. If they get excellent QBing in 2016, the sky's the limit.

Joined: 12/31/2014

MGoPoints: 4730

Perkis-Size Me

February 27th, 2016 at 1:22 PM ^

Exactly.

And luckily we have a coach where the QB position is probably the last position on the field we really need to worry about.

Harbaugh is one of the best in the business, if not the best, at developing QBs and maximizing their full potential.

O'Korn will undoubtedly have growing pains next Fall when he finally gets into live game action, but if he's as good as advertised, he could be the difference between an 8 win season and potentially an 11-12 win season.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 11/30/2011

MGoPoints: 105776