Kwitkowski, Eddins, Gunderson, Graham Glasgow, Burzinski, not sure on other two.
this may be of some local interest
Kwitkowski, Eddins, Gunderson, Graham Glasgow, Burzinski, not sure on other two.
Mike Kwiatkowski's going to play quite a bit this year, I think...
Agreed, that's why I listed him first. I'll add Kerridge to my list, too.
Right, not sure why I missed him, the obvious choice.
probably Paul Gyarmati (5th Year Senior Backup FB). I thought he was 2nd on the depth chart for the spring game.
So this means our line depth is solved? No more walk-on's on the 2-3 deep?
What about Kenny Allen or Bo Dever? I know they're both freshman, but they're two other walk-ons that come to mind.
I don't think that's possible. We're still looking for room for a class of 25 for 2013. How could we give out 2 2012 scholarships?
It's 2012 right now. The 2013 kids will be here in 2013. They have 7 un-used spots that needed to go somewhere for 2012
Hoke moved to 4 year scholarships last year along with the rest of the B1G. Are these different?
Walk-on Scholarships are always one year, because you never know what class a kid will be in when he gets one awarded. Doesn't even matter, though. The scholarship crunch next year is taken care of by senior departure and non-renewed 5th years, for the most part. The 85 overall limit never really came into play for it.
The last sentence isn't true, wine 85 limit will come into play for the 2013 class.
Yes, this is different. Recruited players get four year scholarships. Walk ons can still get one year scholarships, as far as I know. Changing that rule would be dumb and wrong.
That Captain Kovacs be the one to tweet it
Is it just me or does "Captain Kovacs" just sound like he should be part of the Justice League or The Avengers. UM now has their super hero duo with...
Captain Kovacs and the Dilithium Kid??
(I know there has got to be a million other superhero nicknames for Denard, but Dilithium Kid is what popped into my head)
congrats to those 7, but how do we have 7 available scholarships? I thought there was a numbers crunch.
Nope, check the depth chart by class. We have a number of slots open. These are also one year scholarships, keep that in mind.
Ah didn't think about the one year thing. Makes much more sense.
There is not a numbers crunch this year. There are only 75 players on the roster who came to Michigan on a Letter of Intent. So there are as many as 10 players (including Kovacs, of course) who came to Michigan as walkons who are on scholarship this season.
and well below where OSU's sanctions would take them. Attirtion has been a bitch for UM the last 5 years.
They'll feel it in the next couple of years because they were able to backdate a bunch of scholarship kids last year. But yeah, USC's "sanctions" really didn't amount to much of a deterrent.
The Team, The Team, The Team!
I hope they show Brady rewarding the Walk On's on CTK 3.
The clip from Vandy was pretty cool. I would like to see team 133 reaction to the news.
And the legend of Brady Hoke continues to grow! How great are those seven kids feeling right now.
Slow down. Literally every single team in the country does this. Rich Rod did, as did Coach Carr. You have 85 scholarships, you may as well use them all. Even if it's just a one year financial break and a pat on the back, it's worth it.
Aren't we forgetting about him?
Glanda prlly got one
If any of these walk-ons are O-linemen, can we put them ahead of the freshmen, especially Kalis and Magnuson? At the end of the day, I know we need to put the best guys out there, but I'd rather not have any of those guys, especially offensive linemen, get thrown into the fire their freshman year. Do whatever it takes to keep them on the sideline and in the weight room until they're ready, especially when one of those guys (Kalis) is the crown jewel of your most recent recruiting class.
can put them ahead of the freshman without this scholarship. This changes nothing regarding the skills of the players. IMO, if Kalis is the best or even 2nd best option, burn the redshirt. There is a wave of OL players coming behind him so it doesn't make a ton of sense to save him if he is in fact a better option.
Sure we can start them ahead of the freshmen. In fact, if you yourself are enrolled at Michigan, theoretically, you could start ahead of the freshmen.
But Hoke and Borges and especially Mattison have been very consistent:
Aiee, I hate all caps. But the coaching staff have stayed on message with this all along. If you look at the LB corps last year, and the secondary, you saw different starters, based on the level of play. While it was injury related Woolfolk was somewhat "demoted" in the secondary.
There are at least two caveats/exceptions I can think of (to "the best player" principle):
I do like lists, and hate run on paragraphs. Mgobloggers seem pretty good about avoiding the latter.
I also dislike incoherence, and some of the spelling/grammar errors, but don't usually bother negging or snarking for either.
I've noticed you really enjoy long comments.
You never, ever lose a trick inentionally. You have these kids for (at most) four playing years whether you RS them or not. If they're your best options this year, you use them THIS year. Might they be even better later? Sure, they might. They might also not. Or the rest of the team might collapse around them. Wouldn't you be upset we didn't use Kalis his freshman year when putting him in might have gotten us 11-2 instead of 9-4 if it turns out his magnificent senior year is spent surrounded by a bunch of ineptitude he can't fix by himself?
Play your best card.
I can't help myself, sometimes I just gotta hold that bower bro!
I would. There's nothing more frustrating than seeing my partner lay a Bauer when we've already lost three tricks. The second most frustrating is no one in California knowing what Euchre is.
I'm about 200 miles north of you in Paso Robles. My substandard Euchre skills get used once a year during summer vacations in Lexington. Sure the weather's nice out here, but no Bells distribution, no Euchre, and constant media reminders about how rad USC is...
You go to hell and you DIE!
It depends. If a freshman is appreciably better than a walkon, put him in. But if he is only slightly better, is it worth the loss of a year? Would you put a true freshman in against Baby Seal / MAC Snack U to give your starters rest? Conversely, would you put a redshirt in against Alabama if you were being blown out and weren't going to win? Would you put a freshman in to replace a starter with a cramp, a starter who had to come out that day, but would be able to play the rest of the reason? Would you put a freshman in near the end of a season when you knew you couldn't win the Big 10 and were somewhat playing the string out? In all these scenarios, I think I would put in a walkon/backup ahead of a true freshman.
If I were a coach at Ohio last year, I wouldn't have used a redshirt against Michigan. In fact, I think that two years ago, Ryan might have been better than some of our LB Corps, but I'm glad they didn't play him as a true freshman.
In general, I think you're correct. But a strategy of instant gratification doesn't always pay off. Sometimes, even if they're highly talented, freshmen really need a year to acclimate, gain weight, improve strength, get the technique and schemes down, etc.
As I said, even if he is only slightly better, that might be the different between the Champs Sports and the Capitol One bowls. You save him, and you've still only got 4 years out of him, with no guarantee in any of those years that you'll approach the same level of success you had this year.
You can't see the future. Play for the present.
off topic but I must correct the opinion that you never ever lose a trick intentionally in Euchre.
Here is a typical scenario where you would want to lose a trick on purpose in order to set yourself up for the win.
Here are your options:
I thought Kalis was rated so highly in part because he is so college ready, unlike most freshmen OL's. Doesn't mean he won't get better as an upperclassman, but there's no sense in sitting a kid who's ready just to have him four years from now when he's even more ready.
If he's not ready, then yes, sit. But otherwise, I hope he steps up and has a great year.
It worked with Lewan!
What if he leaves after this year with a year of eligibility left, did it do any good to redshirt him?
Fairly certain lewan was smaller than kalis and less college ready on day 1
Don't disagree, but there is really no way of telling whether being thrown out there (even if not fully ready) would have given him valuable experience or would have ruined his confidence. I don't know him, but judging by how he handles himself in public, I tend to believe that it would have given him experience without hurting his confidence and therefore he might have been just that much better this year. Of course if he comes back, the incremental value gained by playing as a true freshman is likely <<< value he would add as a 5th year senior.
Just based on the depth chart (pdf):
Brink and Simmons earned them last year I think. Obs this doesn't count Kovacs himself.
Seth Broekhuizen, K; Chris Eddins, TE
This is one of my favorite things about college football.. I love when the walkons are awarded full rides. The video of the Vandy kid getting his scholarship was one of the greatest videos (besides I love you Denard) I have seen all offseason.. Congrats to the new full scholarship memebers of Team 133!
Hoke called them all up on stage in front of the team and then said they were all getting scholarships. Everyone went nuts. I love Hoke.
Just to clarify a few things regarding scholarships for walk-ons. Once a walk-on has been on campus for 2 years, giving them a scholarship counts against the 85 but does NOT count toward the annual limit of 25. Even with a large class of 2013, there will still be several walk-ons that get scholarships.
If they count against the 85, then I don't see how you think several walk-ons are going to receive scholarships in 2013. Unless you think there will be alot of attrition after signing day.