August 10th, 2010 at 1:26 PM ^
Grady
August 10th, 2010 at 1:26 PM ^
Denard Robinson
August 10th, 2010 at 3:32 PM ^
No no it's gonna be Tate
August 10th, 2010 at 5:59 PM ^
But who will hand it off to Tate?
August 10th, 2010 at 8:24 PM ^
i guess i could hand him the ball if you guys need me to. just don't ask me to throw because there's a reason i didn't play football
August 10th, 2010 at 1:27 PM ^
I know he played both sides of the ball in HS, but aren't they planning on him playing LB?
August 10th, 2010 at 1:30 PM ^
RR's spread/option offense will fix that problem by having the ball already in the hands of pure dilithium. Speed will not be a problem. Focusing your eyes on what is happening due to the pure speed of it all will be the problem.
August 10th, 2010 at 1:34 PM ^
August 10th, 2010 at 1:35 PM ^
August 10th, 2010 at 2:37 PM ^
next time edit your original post
August 10th, 2010 at 1:35 PM ^
Here's my question: If Shaw is declared ineligible, would he be out for the entire season or would he be out "x" amount of games until grades resurface?
If he is ineligible, I'd like to see Grady take the speed back role. Not saying Smith, Cox or Fitz aren't fast because realisically if our o-line produces like they should be able to and we have our WR's come through with blocks downfield, any one of those guys can take it the distance.
August 10th, 2010 at 1:41 PM ^
I think he's out the entire semester, so he could be eligible for the bowlgame.
I know in basketball, they break down eligibility into semesters.
August 10th, 2010 at 1:37 PM ^
Didn't we already go over this? Shaw Qualified.
August 10th, 2010 at 1:40 PM ^
I know some around here have posted that in various comments, but I got the impression the official word has not come down yet
If you get a chance between booting kids out of your program. Bastard
August 10th, 2010 at 1:42 PM ^
then why did RR say that they're waiting on his summer term grades in his press conference yesterday?
Joe_Stapes Michael Shaw is still completing summer school, has not yet been cleared.
August 10th, 2010 at 1:44 PM ^
Quit trolling our board!
August 10th, 2010 at 1:44 PM ^
Hey Les, go focus on your damn strong football team.
August 10th, 2010 at 2:34 PM ^
Les Miles does not apologize. Enough People said it so I figured it was for sure...
August 10th, 2010 at 10:33 PM ^
Because when things are repeated over and over they become true no matter what!
LSU is 2010 National Champ, LSU is 2010 National Champ, LSU is 2010 National Champ, LSU is 2010 National Champ, LSU is 2010 National Champ, LSU is 2010 National Champ
True yet!? HA please.
Good Luck Leslie. << /sarcasm - I hope you go 0-11-1 (Tying those assholes from WVU).
As for the OP, I think Vinny Smith may have enough speed to be a considered speed back as well as Fitz Toussaint, although I believe they are much more known for their quicks, and wiggles.
August 10th, 2010 at 10:38 PM ^
HAVE A NICE DAY.
August 10th, 2010 at 1:37 PM ^
I'd like to think that T-Rob would be able to move into the backfield, but realistically, most likely Fitz. Not as fast as T-Rob, but way way more complete of a back.
August 10th, 2010 at 1:38 PM ^
The speed back is . . . nobody. Why do we need a "speed back"? We have several running backs who can tote the ball. And you don't need a speed back when Michael Cox is running over fools left and right, breaking long runs, and scoring loads of touchdowns.
August 10th, 2010 at 1:50 PM ^
disagree, i'd really like to know if there's a TD back ready to step up for MICH
August 10th, 2010 at 3:08 PM ^
Dee Hart, baby!
August 10th, 2010 at 1:56 PM ^
i would just like the best healthy back out there. i would have loved to have 25 carries out of brandon minor each game the past two years.
August 10th, 2010 at 2:07 PM ^
Definitely agree. It's not very often that Michigan has had a stable of running backs as they do now. No one was asking for a 'speed back' when Mike Hart was racking up crazy yardage...
August 10th, 2010 at 10:44 PM ^
Well, I wasn't exactly asking for a speed back during Hart's time with Michigan, but there were a number of times I thought about running onto the field and strapping rockets to Hart's cleats. But that's neither here nor there.
Like many have said, even without Shaw I like what Cox and Toussaint(?) bring to the table. Add in V. Smith and that's a talented, but unproven, backfield. Let's just hope I can leave out the 'unproven' part by the time we reach the Big Ten schedule.
August 10th, 2010 at 2:58 PM ^
Last time I checked, Michigan was pretty successful for most of the past decade with Mike Hart / Chris Perry as our premier running backs, and neither of those guys was speedy.
I just want a back that can HOLD ON TO THE DAMN BALL, pick up key blocks, manage to fall forward, and hit the holes that this O-line will create. (I guess I want a Mike Hart clone). I don't see why Fitz, Cox or Smith can't do this.
August 10th, 2010 at 3:02 PM ^
Are you related to Cox? His agent-in-waiting?
August 10th, 2010 at 10:28 PM ^
Nah . . . but he's mah dude.
August 10th, 2010 at 1:43 PM ^
Not directed at you, OP, but a general question to the board:
Do we really need to classify each player as a certain type of back? Speed back, power back, shifty back? The guy who can move the chains is going to get most of the reps, regardless of how he does it. I agree that Hopkins is likely going to be our 2nd-and-short "bruiser" but whichever guy can consistently get the job done is going to take most of the snaps.
I guess all I'm saying is that in the past we've had 1 primary back. Minor, Hart, Perry, A-Train...maybe the spread style changes this, but we've never really had any change-of-pace guys (excepting injury or exhaustion for our main back). Anyone agree or is this nonsense?
Either way, to answer your question, I think Toussaint is going to emerge some point during this season as the featured back. There is a lot of talent at that position, but if I had to guess I'd go with Toussaint.
EDIT: And of course Magnus beats me to the punch....
August 10th, 2010 at 1:56 PM ^
I agree. Especially since the defense can adjust to whoever is in there. It's not like Michigan can sneak #20 onto the field after #33 has just gotten a carry without the defense noticing and/or making some adjustments.
August 10th, 2010 at 2:16 PM ^
But when you have a 2-back set it can really mix up the defense with a speed back and a power back on the field. This offense is very different than the 1-back pro style offense of the past, we are relying on different backs to run different styles of the offense. With that being said I don't think it is exactly necessary to have a "speed back", but the more diversity you can bring then the more likely you will confuse the defense and get bigger plays.
August 10th, 2010 at 3:58 PM ^
that proves the rule, but worth mentioning:
Chris Howard, Clarence Williams, and A-Train all split carries and there was no "primary" back, per say.
August 10th, 2010 at 5:52 PM ^
(I think you mean per se.)
Chris Howard was the #1 back in '97, but back then, the #1 back didn't get 95% of the carries, as was the case in the later Carr years. Howard had more carries and yards than Thomas and Williams combined, even though he was knocked out of a couple games.
August 10th, 2010 at 1:43 PM ^
Is it fair to say that speed is somewhat overrated at that position? I don't have the data handy, but the great majority of runs with positive yardage are less than ten yards. Vision, elusiveness, and power seem much more important. Mike Hart (even without a ton of power) was way more effective than the speedy Carlos Brown.
August 10th, 2010 at 1:47 PM ^
Yes, speed is definitely overrated. But with that said, if a guy doesn't have speed, he needs to have something else. Other than Vincent Smith, I don't know if anyone else has proven that they have that "something", and even Smith has unimpressive stats against I-A competition.
August 10th, 2010 at 3:04 PM ^
Hannibal, I hear what you are saying, but Cox and Fitz have yet to even step on to the field in a college game, so it is a bit early to know what they will show.
As for Smith, the only 1-A games in which he had more than 3 carries were Wisco and OSU, where he averaged 3.5 and 4.0 on the ground (8 carries in each game), respectively. He also caught 7 passes for 54 yds against Wisco and 3 for 28 yds against OSU (yes, I looked these up on ESPN), so I don't agree that his stats are unimpressive against 1-A.
August 10th, 2010 at 3:13 PM ^
Cox scored a touchdown last year without touching the field? AMAZING!!!11
August 10th, 2010 at 3:18 PM ^
I should have been more precise - yes, Cox stepped on the field. Against Delaware State. (and maybe 1 or 2 plays against EMU). I don't personally count the Delaware State game as stepping on the field in a real college fb game. By the time he came in, we were winning by a score of like 674 to negative 80. My point is that neither Cox or Fitz have been tested in a game situation, so the point contained in the post that I responded to - that they haven't shown what they can do - was premature.
August 10th, 2010 at 2:28 PM ^
Noel Devine and his 1,465 rushing yards would say that a speed back can be extremely effective in this offense. I am not sure why people keep forgetting that this is not the pro-style offense with a big bruiser running behind 5 OLs and 2 TEs. In a pro-style offense a bruiser style running back is the best fit, but in a spread style offense both work well as seen with Noel Devine and Steve Slaton who were both tiny backs that put up huge numbers. It would definately be nice to have a speedy guy who can break a long run with a bruiser to pick up tough yards.
August 10th, 2010 at 3:14 PM ^
Nobody is saying that a speed back would not be effective in this offense. Just that a speed back is not NECESSARY for this offense.
Yes, Devine and Slaton put up huge numbers. Those guys would have put up huge numbers in just about any college offense.
Similarly, a guy like Mike Hart would be able to put up great numbers in this offense. That is the beauty of the spread - it can be modified to fit the personnel.
August 10th, 2010 at 10:30 PM ^
Kay-Jay Harris and Quincy Wilson are good arguments for power backs in this offense.
Conclusion? Good running backs in this offense will be good running backs in this offense, whether they're fast, powerful, or both.
August 10th, 2010 at 1:54 PM ^
Nobody gave a crap about speed backs when Minor was healthy the last couple years. I think the more important question is who will be our good back?
August 10th, 2010 at 2:00 PM ^
would you eat yourself? I would...
August 10th, 2010 at 2:03 PM ^
would ya eat it?
August 10th, 2010 at 2:07 PM ^
barbeque spare ribs
August 10th, 2010 at 2:28 PM ^
"Hey Norm! Did you gain weight?"
August 10th, 2010 at 2:31 PM ^
I'd cover myself with brown mustard and relish, I'd be so delicious