August 10th, 2014 at 11:20 AM ^
a) you have to wonder about any player who had a disappointing debut and still needs "motivating" - doubt Green needs any motivation.
b) I am noticing a trend on these boards that anyone or anything out of order is mostly due to "motivating" rather than say... what they show in practice.
c) sometimes things are just what they appear to be and it's not some great mastermind puppetmaster pulling strings.
d) my comments are not specific to Green, but broadly
August 10th, 2014 at 11:31 AM ^
August 10th, 2014 at 11:41 AM ^
August 10th, 2014 at 11:48 AM ^
August 10th, 2014 at 1:56 PM ^
August 10th, 2014 at 2:13 PM ^
August 10th, 2014 at 11:32 AM ^
If you find a guy who responds positively to the poking why wouldn't you just keep poking him?
Green came in overweight last year and carried the weight all season and was less than expected.
Then he came into camp this year 20 lbs lighter. I'll wait til I see them in game action to judge.
Alternatively they might just all 3 be looking really good. Maybe everyone is motivated and working hard?
August 10th, 2014 at 1:05 PM ^
weight when the coach told him he couldn't be a running back. He may need to be pushed which could be what Hoke is doing. Hoke also said the best blockers were going to play. That may be another issue with Green.
Green has plenty of time to develop and he will clearly get playing time this year. He has facets that he needs to work on. He has shown he has the dedication to get himself in shape. He needs the dedication to continue to improve and stay in shape.
August 10th, 2014 at 1:21 PM ^
spring game. But that might just be wishful thinking.
If the line can improve all three are good options. Johnson showed promise last year from the little we saw of him.
But boy is it a small sample size.
August 10th, 2014 at 12:41 PM ^
I hear ya, but at the same time there are always guys, and often they tend to be the more talented guys that things come easily to, that are less than motivated for practice yet shine in the competition and attention of a game environment. I like that we are reinforcing that practice is important and the expectation to practice hard. But, we should never play the best practice players. We should play the best game players. We don't want to make practice more important than the game. That is rediculous, and the end goal must be kept in perspective. I think sometimes UM coaches have leaned too far towards playing the best guys in practice which is a mistake. The idea that how your practice is how you will play is not accurate for many people and human pshychology and physiology isn't hard to figure out that when more people are watching you, you are more likely to put forth a better effort and have a greater emotional and physical response.
August 10th, 2014 at 1:08 PM ^
August 10th, 2014 at 3:00 PM ^
It's only natural for a less talented guy to get more up for practice, especially if that less talented player percieves that he is less talented than the player he is competing with for playing time. he has more to gain and is motivated to overcome the percieved obstacle and prove the doubters wrong. However, when the game is live, people are watching, and the video cameras are running, both players are likely to be up more for competition. Once both players are up (not simply the less talented one), it becomes clear which player is really better. And, it wouldn't surprise me at all if this is the strategy of Hoke et al. to motivate players.
Regarding the coaches perspective I think it's clear. Hoke has clearly stated the guys that practice the best will play. I think that's a mistake. Don't get me wrong, you have to motivate players and don't want to reinforce that it's OK to practice without effort. And, you need to reward those who do practice hard. But, to place what happens in practice over what happens in games is a faulty value system. You have to find a way to motivate everyone, reward hard work in practice, while still playing the best players (in games). Like the old saying, "Hard work beats talent when talent doesn't work hard." But, when talent works hard it's unbeatable unless matched by equally hardworking talent.
August 10th, 2014 at 11:14 AM ^
Yeah, more things to overreact about.
August 10th, 2014 at 11:26 AM ^
Except the o-line... I think it's perfectly fine to 'react' over the offensive line
August 10th, 2014 at 11:17 AM ^
August 10th, 2014 at 11:30 AM ^
This board is essentially founded on (and ineluctably bound to continue) being a place where the whole (twitter, newspaper, message board, website, mag) wide world of Michigan football recruiting and other goings-on are compiled and discussed.
August 10th, 2014 at 11:36 AM ^
August 10th, 2014 at 11:42 AM ^
August 10th, 2014 at 11:47 AM ^
yep, 100% this
August 10th, 2014 at 11:55 AM ^
August 10th, 2014 at 1:13 PM ^
over those muscles that I want to flex sourly.
August 10th, 2014 at 3:12 PM ^
Acid
.
Yes
.
August 10th, 2014 at 1:58 PM ^
Evidently pearlw thinks the purpose of this thread is to be a whiny little baby. And I say go for it pearlw, because you're clearly very good at it.
August 10th, 2014 at 11:24 AM ^
I swear this thread title has changed 4 or 5 times in the past 15 minutes.
August 10th, 2014 at 11:26 AM ^
Stick with a title OP
August 10th, 2014 at 11:27 AM ^
This time he forgot the third period to complete the ellipsis after Smith
August 10th, 2014 at 11:28 AM ^
Offensive linemen, fresh cuts. pic.twitter.com/G8TirDHHt3
— Michigan Football (@umichfootball) August 10, 2014
August 10th, 2014 at 1:14 PM ^
Love it! Showing some unity and leadership.
August 10th, 2014 at 1:38 PM ^
August 10th, 2014 at 3:05 PM ^
Watching this year's mgovideos and seeing the omg shirtless, twitter etc, pics. The team overall is Ginormous! compared to when Hoke stepped on campus 4 years ago. Along with recruiting Wellman is definitely earning his paycheck.
August 10th, 2014 at 11:29 AM ^
1a, 1b or 2 as long as the O can move the ball via the RB position (not rely on DG) and greatly reduces neg yard plays. They'll all get carries. The best backs will get the lions share. Name on front is more important than name on back of Jersey. Boom cliched!
August 10th, 2014 at 11:50 AM ^
... let's go... adidas?
August 10th, 2014 at 12:37 PM ^
I agree 100% and its not even a cliche. If SOMEONE becomes a 1400+ yard rusher and that SOMEONE is not Green, I could care less. Just like if we get a shutdown corner named Stribling and Peppers is mediocre - I don't care. Obviously I'd like them all to be good, and by my statement we still require having 40-45 good players to fill out a 2 deep but I could care less - in a football sense - which specific ones they are.
Specific to the running game is Smith gets 1300 yards, Johnson 700, Green 200 - and we go 9-3, fine by me. Obviously if none of them do well, then that's a separate issue.
August 10th, 2014 at 1:28 PM ^
just how much less could you care?
August 10th, 2014 at 11:44 AM ^
For some, this will probably be the most important news of the day:
Hearing that U-M hasn't decided whether the block M nosebumper will remain once season starts pic.twitter.com/eKnPCnNd4A
— MVictors (@MVictors) August 10, 2014
August 10th, 2014 at 11:48 AM ^
I hope it stays. It's grown on me.
August 10th, 2014 at 1:10 PM ^
August 10th, 2014 at 5:24 PM ^
August 10th, 2014 at 11:48 AM ^
If Johnson wins the battle, I'll be excited! He's a local kid, well forgotten because of our blindness to two-stars, and will have toppled a supremely talented depth chart (on paper).
August 10th, 2014 at 12:47 PM ^
That's all well and good, but I'd be unhappy if a 5-star talent (Green) transfers because he's not getting playing time.
August 10th, 2014 at 12:55 PM ^
August 10th, 2014 at 1:41 PM ^
August 10th, 2014 at 1:55 PM ^
August 10th, 2014 at 3:09 PM ^
I think most of us agree that recruiting stars matter. Granted, it's not 100%. There are always guys that are highly ranked that don't pan out (BWC) and plenty that are less so that wind up incredible (JMFR). But, I'm not a coach and never see a single high school kid play in person. So, as a fan it's impossible for me to tell which is which. So, I have to assume recruiting rankings are accurate and the higher ranked recruits have more talent, have a higher cieling, and are generally better. So, it's natural to root for the highest rated recruits to be successful because it means your team is more likely to be successful. With that understood you never want to see a higher rated player leave because he's displaced by a lower ranked player. Granted, sometimes it may mean the lower ranked player developed late or was poorly evaluated, or that the higher ranked player was over-rated in high school, developed early, or maybe even has a poor work ethic. Whatever the case, that would the exception and not the rule. Therefore since I can't tell the difference I'd prefer to play the odds and always hope the higher ranked kid is better and hope to see him stay, start, and become our number #1 position player all the time.
August 10th, 2014 at 3:34 PM ^
But you're thinking about it backward. Sure, higher ranked players are more likely to be good college players than lower ranked one. That's the case before they hit campus, because those rankings are all the data we have to go on (or are based on all the data we have). However, once guys start practicing, start growing, etc., things change and therefore our projections need to as well.
Take a guy like Frank Clark. He was a low 3-star because he played like a DE but was the size of a safety. Then he put on 6 pounds in 2 years, and all of a sudden he played like a DE and was the size of one as well, but kept much of his athleticism. There is no way to predict that, so it wasn't reflected in his recruit ranking. Thus, we need to adjust our expectations for him.
You said in your post that it's impossible for you to tell which is which (guy who overachieves his ranking or not), but that's not true. After JMFR was here for two years, were you still questioning whether he was a throw-away recruit or not? How about Desmond Morgan or Frank Clark? Typically, we can see after a couple years where a guy stands. You don't always know, because sometimes guys mature later and sometimes they have stars ahead of them. But when a 5-star kid can't see the field, that almost certainly means he just didn't live up to his billing.
No one was super bummed when Max Martin, high level RB recruit, transfered instead of the 3-star RB from his class. That's because the 3-star was Mike Hart and it was clear the recruiting services just got that one wrong. So if Smith becomes a star and Green doesn't, don't be upset that the 5-star is a bust, because those things just happen.
August 10th, 2014 at 4:44 PM ^
First off I want thank you for the good discussion of points we disagree on versus get upset that we don't agree. This is an interesting conversation and I think this style of discussion is helping us wash out our opinions versus defend them from attack.
To your points, yes I agree that we need to adjust our ideas on talent after kids get to school and start to play. And, you're right, I am using my eyes and what I see of them. For example, I could see from my eyes that Frank Clark was an athlete and had a frame to put on weight. IMO he was just thrust into playing 2 years before he was ready. He should have RS'ed and we should have him for another year. My eyes can tell me that. Ryan had the luxury of RS'ing. But, my eyes told me he is a talented player from the first time I recall hearing his name in the spring game (3 years ago?). I'm not sure I followed recruiting duing his recruitement or I just don't remember. But my point is, I saw both of them making athletic/big/exciting (whatever word you want to use) plays that tells me they have talent.
If for example you compare Morgan to Gedeon, personally I'd like to see Gedeon play. Based on his age, how well he performed against OSU, and his recruiting profile I think his ceiling is higher that I'd like to see him jump over a guy like Morgan who IMO is solid, but nothing special. I haven't seen quite enough from Bolden yet on the field to beleive he's ready to live up to his recruiting profile, but if he starts to show flashes I'd probably get on board with him too. If you compare Drake Johnson and Derrick Green however, there isn't as much evidence. I have hardly seen Johnson play so I don't have a lot to look at yet with him other than his recruiting profile. I've seen some from Green last year, but I feel like his weight was a big problem last year, plus I saw a lot more on film from him during his recruiting. I can't lie...seeing pictures like this makes me giddy. (not sure if this pic link will work, so just picture a high school version of Green in a sleeveless shirt looking swole).
So in this particular case I guess a combination of Green's recruiting profile, his weight issues from last year that seem to be fixed, and a lack of evidence from Johnson make me prefer Green. Now, if this season I see Johnson get in there and tear it up, then OK, I will adjust my opinion. But, I haven't seen Johnson truck someone, break a huge run, juke a guy out of his jockstrap, etc. But, I have seen Ryan, Clark, and Gedeon all make big plays to suggest they have talent. If there's some film out there on Johnson that I've missed help me out.
August 10th, 2014 at 2:00 PM ^
August 10th, 2014 at 11:51 AM ^
I'm not at media day, but for those interested, I'll be tweeting misleadingly paraphrased snippets of quotes all day.
— Bryan Mac (@Bry_Mac) August 10, 2014
August 10th, 2014 at 12:04 PM ^
Guess I missed the MGoBoard post where BISB announced that he was going to work for FREEP.
August 10th, 2014 at 11:56 AM ^
Tweets? Or is there something I could be watching right now?