If we dont get Kozan do we take another OL in 2013??

Submitted by Chi-Blue on

Title really says it all. Opinions or inside info on the situation??

MGoBoard
Football
Alex Kozan

aiglick

February 25th, 2012 at 9:43 PM ^

Kugler looks to be our option at Center. Really skilled, good size, and his dad is an O line coach with the Steelers. At this point not a big deal if we miss out on Kozan.

Joined: 11/27/2010

MGoPoints: 21418

turd ferguson

February 25th, 2012 at 9:45 PM ^

Personally, I'd continue recruiting in case anything unexpected happens with one of the current commits (decommitment, qualification issue, etc.), but I wouldn't plan to go higher than five - and I'd communicate that to the current commits. That's partly because I think the additional scholarship(s) is better used elsewhere but also because I think bringing in more guys in one class than there are OL positions might lead to someone getting cold feet. If I were the coaching staff, my primary goal with OL recruiting right now would be to get this group as close with one another, the coaches, and the university more generally as possible. This is an amazing group that could do great things together, and I'd be thrilled if these are the guys we end up with on Signing Day.

Joined: 12/09/2009

MGoPoints: 26493

PurpleStuff

February 25th, 2012 at 10:11 PM ^

I agree that bringing in more guys than positions creates an odd situation (you pretty much know that half the guys in the group won't ever get a chance to start) but I don't know that it prevents you from landing commits.  Stanford had 4 linemen in the fold (three 4-stars) and was still able to add Garnett late and two 5-stars on signing day.  Who knows if taking that many guys at one position will end up being good business, but cold feet didn't seem to be an issue.

I'm guessing (much like with kids admitted to law school all thinking they will finish in the top 25% of their class) that most recruits think they will end up playing no matter how many other players are in the fold.  Or at least they can be talked into thinking that way.

Joined: 04/21/2009

MGoPoints: 15969

WolvinLA2

February 25th, 2012 at 11:09 PM ^

Personally, I'm worried most about 2013, when Khoury will be gone and Kugler will be a true frosh. We'll have no real back-up center, and very little OL depth at all, outside of the true frosh. The fact that Kozan is a year older than these 2013 guys and would be here this fall makes him more valuable.

Joined: 11/13/2009

MGoPoints: 58191

CRex

February 26th, 2012 at 8:35 AM ^

It's like people didn't even watch the Sugar Bowl.  Molk goes down, Khoury gets nervous.  Since the next guy in the depth chart was Miller, a true freshman, we end up playing Molk for the game despite the fact he only has one good leg.

No C in 2012 means a depth chart of two for awhile.  One injury or one guy not developing then means a problem.  

Joined: 09/28/2009

MGoPoints: 9010

PurpleStuff

February 25th, 2012 at 9:50 PM ^

The coaches were clearly prepared to take 6-7 guys in the 2012 class but ended up with only 4 (so far).  After next season we lose at least 4 offensive linemen to graduation (Lewan will definitely get NFL interest as well).

Just to tread water we need to take 4-5 and Coach Hoke has talked about wanting to lift the overall numbers to 14-16 (we'll have 12 in 2012).  Considering the offers that are still out there, I'm pretty sure we'd take one or two more blue-chip guys if they wanted to commit. 

Joined: 04/21/2009

MGoPoints: 15969

razor93

February 25th, 2012 at 9:50 PM ^

We can flip Diggs or DGB?  I also wonder if Reeves, Elmer, Wright, or Kiel want to come on board?

/s

When is "/s" repetively redundant? 

Joined: 03/30/2011

MGoPoints: 374

razor93

February 25th, 2012 at 9:57 PM ^

Is labeled redundant when I already said it was repetively redundant does that tear a whole in the fabric of the space time continum?

Joined: 03/30/2011

MGoPoints: 374

HarmonHowardWoodson

February 25th, 2012 at 9:58 PM ^

At this point, do we really WANT Kozan? The commits that we are getting are great, in part, because they WANT to be Michigan Men. It seems to me that if Kozan really WANTED to be a Michigan Man that he would have committed to us shortly after not sending in his LOI to Iowa. Even if he decided tomorrow that he wanted to become a Wolverine, I don't know how I would feel about that. Is his heart going to be in it? Is he really going to buy into the team, or is he going to leave after a year if he isn't getting playing time?

I hate to say that I don't WANT a highly ranked prospect, but I am leaning towards saying I would prefer that he DIDN'T come to play here.

Joined: 02/25/2012

MGoPoints: 3455

RakeFight

February 25th, 2012 at 10:06 PM ^

Totally agree.  Even before the OL avalanche of the last week, I was thinking that I would not be to excited if I heard that Kozan had picked Michigan.  Now, it's like who cares?

The only situation I can see being excited about having him is if his delay has been due to some kind of disagreement with his parents... like, he wanted Michigan all along, but they wanted Iowa.  Otherwise, his prolonged indecision is nothing but concerning.  And yes, he's only a kid, cut him some slack... but being a kid didn't stop hundreds of other 2012 recruits from making a decision.

Joined: 02/21/2012

MGoPoints: 8507

Elmer

February 25th, 2012 at 10:18 PM ^

Prefer we stick to 5 in this class and spread out the OL depth.  Take another 4 guys in 2014, and another 4 in 2015.  With some attrition and maybe a successful walk-on that should put us in the 15-16 range.

Joined: 04/22/2011

MGoPoints: 5418

MGoCooper

February 25th, 2012 at 10:34 PM ^

I thought we were all opperating on RDT's theory that Kozan is actually the Lindbergh Baby? That Kozan isn't going to school, because then they'd find out he's actually 107 years old.

Joined: 04/21/2011

MGoPoints: 1025