I'm sure the new offensive blocking schemes had nothing to do with the O line being bad. Great point.
Long-term OL Depth Concern
Damn, I better start recruiting some O-linemen.
OK, this is relatively valid. But you're getting WAY ahead of yourself. You're throwing around a bunch of "ifs" and worst-case scenarios, speculating that we might be in trouble 3 years from now. What if Q moves to DT, thrives, and we have one of the best defenses in the country in 2012?
I think RichRod knows he can make a killer offense, maybe without killer talent. I think he's saying "if somehow we can build a killer defense, we'll be unstoppable" and he's right. So maybe he's saying he's cool with playing a couple underclassmen on the Oline in 2013 in order to better our defense, and therefore a better team.
And guess what - if Ash and Talbott end up being studs, or if we bring in a recruit who excels, Q will probably move back to offense. And if they don't? Then we need Q on defense anyway.
You are absolutely right that this year is critical for O-line. However, it's also being handled pretty well, and overall I've been very very happy with Rodriguez's O-line recruiting.
Check back on 2008 and see where we were about this time...
Needs: Severe. Michigan has only five offensive line recruits across the last two classes. Fortunately two of those recruits, Justin Boren and Steve Schilling, appear to be can't-miss players. Beyond them is very little. Expect at least five recruits.
Projected Commits: 5.
Commitments Name State Stars Schools Y/N Notes Dann O'Neill MI ****.5 Michigan Tackle. Rivals 100 (#64). Grand Haven Tribune article. AANews article. Grand Rapids Press. Elliot Mealer OH ***.5 Michigan Tackle prospect. Video. Blade article. Kurt Wermers IN ***.5 Michigan Scout interview. Guard prospect. Article. MGoBlog on Wermers. Scout article. Local newspaper article. Video. Rocko Khoury MI *** Michigan Scout article. Commit article. Patrick Omameh OH *** Michigan Ricky Barnum FL **** Michigan Florida verbal who visited.
This was before we knew that Boren would transfer, obviously. Still, the coaches were well on their way toward a big class at that time. Carr had Dann O'Neill, Wermers, Khoury and Mealer. RR snake oiled away Barnum and reeled in the who? guy Omameh.
Some of these guys didn't work out. O'Neill was a bust. Wermers couldn't get off World of Warcraft. But the class was deep enough that it was able to produce a starter and depth. RR didn't sit on this, either, but followed up with a class that had Q-Wash, Lewan, Schofield and Will Campbell. Two good years meant in '09 all we needed was to focus on an heir apparent for Molk, which we got in Christian Pace.
More to the point, the 2008 offensive line was going to be awful even if Carr transitioned to a clone of Lloyd Carr. This is mostly because we went to a zone blocking scheme in -- I think -- 2006. This is the year we got Schilling, Boren and Dorrestein. Schilling and Boren were among the top guard prospects in the country. Dorrestein, I think, was the first zone-blocking guy; we had to fight off Nebraska for him. Then in 2007 we whiffed on like a dozen tackles who had interest. David Molk was the big pickup. Huyge was the last-minute "oh crap we need OL."
Because we got so many guys in the 2008 class, I think we've all been expecting the 2011 class to be where the next generation signs up. Four commits should do the trick. Depth for 2013 can be assisted by more good pickups in the 2012 class.
So play it out...
Counting Zettel in this class and Will Campbell's permanent move, by 2013 we're looking at needing, say, five guys in the 2012 and 2013 classes, say seven due to normal attrition and guys not working out. The offensive line is fine.
I agree with your overall point, but this thread is predicated on QWashington not being on the Oline, so you probably shouldn't include him in your depth charts.
completely agree that RR is doing a good job finding quality OL personnel. I'd rather he got 3 or 4 each year, rather than the big class / small class zig-zag, but easier said than done.
Here's the key point IMO:
Then: "Michigan has only five offensive line recruits across the last two classes."
Now: 3 OL recruits across the last two classes.
Then: recruited 6 guys
Now: Most are expecting/predicting 5, with maybe a swing recruit who can also play DL.
Then: Need described as "severe"
Now: "Recruit defense, we need DBs and LBs to save our ship!"
OK, so the coaches aren't saying that but you don't get the sense from reading the Michigan blogs that its much of a concern.
I'd be happy with a class of 6 in 2011, but I don't get the sense that many people see the need as "severe".
Your 2013 depth chart is a sort of a best-case scenario because it includes Campbell and QWashington. Campbell will hopefully redshirt, but what are the chances of a junior year red-shirt...rarely happens. And Washington experimenting on DL might be a full time move.
Obviously, things would look way better if those guys are both on the OL in 2013.
I know Posada is considered an OT, but he's short and may actually end up at OG. If Bryant is in the class that becomes more likely.
Agreed, except Why Omameh at OT in 2012? Anyway I think we'll be fine at OL. If we pick up 4 OL's a year we'll be fine, might be able to get away with 3 this year.
Don't forget RR's vaunted walk-on program, 4 years with Barwis and some of the boys might be able to contribute.
Really not smack this guy with the banhammer?
At first I thought this guy was KoB, but he is much worse. At least it seemed like KoB was actually a Michigan fan. This guy is just a troll.
I miss KoB he was entertaning as all get up, he had SKILLZZZZ
The DL looks relative good in comparison. Black, Ash, Talbott, Paskorz, Wilkins, Washington. 6 guys in the last two classes (though some may be LB).
6 (or lets say) 5, versus 3 in the OL
3 position vs 5 in the OL
an easier position to start early at
I certainly trust that the coaches know much better than I about whether the Campbell for Washington trade is a good one. I also trust that they know which high school athletes to recruit for the type of OL that Michigan uses. What I don't understand is the paucity of scholarships devoted to this position. By my count, next year we will have 13 OL on scholarship for five positions while we'll have 14 receiver on scholarship for three positions. Nobody (not even the coaches) can predict injuries or busts and it seems that we are playing russian roulette with our OL. I'd love to see 3 or more OL recruited for this year and about 5 for next year. As it stands, we are too thin.
Maybe we should bring Millen in to find a O-line for us. He did a marvelous job for the Lions.