Hayes could have a chance to be the third down back, but I think Smith is definitely the leader, and it's looked like he's been very impressive so far this fall. He's gotta be the one they're talking about
Michigan's 3rd down back?
If they are thinking Smith as the 3rd down back this early, do you believe they feel he isn't going to be the primary back ... this early in fall practice?
Swanson oneil most likely
I'm thinking that Smith's size is against him in the primary back competition. The coaches want a guy to carry 20-30 times in a game, and justified or not there's probably fear that he won't be able to stay healthy on that pace.
Ronnie Hillman was tiny last year, so it's not totally out of the question.
I think the starter will be Shaw/Rawls/Cox, and the 3rd down will be Smith/Hayes
No love for Fitz? I think he could fight for 3rd down back.
It's not that I don't like him, I would just like to see him actually stay healthy.
Really doubtful its Fitz as he does not excel in pass protection. Smith seems logical as a good blocker and also able to get into the flat and make a catch and make someone miss.
Fitz has been all of, what, 4 plays and you can deduce that he doesn't excel in pass protection?
No chance that it is Rawls. He is more of a bruiser than a pass catching third down type back.
Wasn't Justice projected as a possible slot WR? If so, him being the 3rd down back would make a lot of sense (especially because I'm not sure that the coaches would give up on Vincent Smith starting this early). Then again, I doubt he would pass protect very well as a true freshman, so it could be Smith.
The feature back will be Shaw and the 3rd down long situational will be Vincent Smith.
I actually agree with HD on this.
But Hopkins is lurking out there if he can hang onto the damn ball.
What about Steven Hopkins?
I don't think you know what a 3rd down back is. He's expected to play in primarily passing situations, not 3rd and short.
but how are Hopkins' hands? Wouldn't a bigger back who can block as well as catch be what you're looking for?
You're looking for more than just good hands. You want someone who might be a tough cover for an LB, who can be dangerous in space. In receivers you're usually going to prefer one who can make a defender miss rather than one who can break tackles. If you have a big back that can do all of that I would imagine he's your every down back.
reggie bush when you hear 3rd down back
I dont know who Steven Hopkins is...
StePHen, sorry. Yes I know how to spell it, I just had a brain lapse. No need to get all on me about it...
It's pronounced steffen if that helps.
We might see Hopkins as the starting fullback and a back-up at tailback.
I just edited the post with the Link.
Who is our 1st down back? We have a lot of sifting to do before we have any idea what RB plays and when.
That being said I would go with Smith, Fitz or Hayes. So basically I have no clue or preference. I just want about 800 yards out of one of the RBs on our roster. If that happens, I believe we have a pretty healthy Denard all year.
Smith as a 3rd Down back is downright scary, he's not a good blocker does anyone else remember him getting annihilated when he would go to pick up his block? I can't remember specifically but I think it was the Wisconsin game where he got destroyed trying to block. He doesn't have the size to get those tough yards on 3rd down either, he gets hit and can't break tackles. I think it'd be a battle between Hopkins (unless he's the FB) Hayes or Toussaint, those guys to me are 3rd down backs.
1. 3rd down back is not the same as a short yardage back.
2. I thought overall Smith was a good blocker for Denard. Yes he took a shot vs Wisconsin but I remember helping Denard break some good runs.
read the damn posts above you. The difference between an all propose back and a third down back has been discussed several times. That comment was very mlive-like.
The negbang needs to come back.
Maybe you should read it again, OP states who do YOU think will be the 3rd down back. IN YOUR OWN OPINION, which is what the OP was asking of everyone is who you think it should be. If you don't agree with me that's fine, but "negbombing" someone for their opinion because it doesn't match yours totally devalues the OP's question. I like to think of a 3rd down back as a bigger guy with good hands who can catch (yes Smith has shown he catch) or who can hold his block longer to create more time for the QB. I guess I missed these discussions of a third down back compared to a goal line back, but I know the difference. In my opinion V. Smith is a fine running back, he's small, shifty and crafty in open space but as far as breaking tackles and dragging guys after contact I think he lacks that skill set from what I've seen so far of him and in 3rd and long situations I'd like to see a guy who can break a tackle often and create more yards after contact.
With all due respect, thank god you are not a coach. /Rickybobby'd
But I'm such a great coach in NCAA 12....kidding. I'd be interested to have you elaborate on that point.
Sure. You claim to know what a 3rd down back is but I don't think you do. A 3rd down back to anyone who actually watches a bit of football is widely recognized as a back that comes in on obvious passing situations on 3rd down. You ever see Brandon Jacobs or Jerome Bettis in on these situations? By your definition they are perfect for it. No guys like Reggie Bush and that little white guy from NE make careers out of this exact position. They are usually too small to be an every down back (Smith) but are sure handed and are gutsy enough to chop a blitzing LB if need be.
edit: LWG is Danny Woodhead I believe
You're using two extremely large RB's there in Bettis and Jacobs. I'd never use those guys in that situation, and considering Michigan doesn't even have any RB's that are 6'4" 265lbs (Jacobs) or 5'11" 255lbs (Bettis) those are pretty bad examples, Hopkins is probably the only guy remotely close. All my point is, I'd like to see a guy bigger than 5'6" and 170 lbs, I think that's where the confusion is. Bush is 6'0" 200lbs and Woodhead is 5'9" 200lbs, not even comparable to Smith.
Darren Sproles, Felix Jones,Mewelde Moore, Correl Buckhaulter, and old school Eric Metcalf, Dave Megget. Woodhead and Bush are not the same weight, I don't care what the roster says.
Smith got annihilated ahainst Wisco when his assignment was to block JJ Watt. When the scheme puts a 5'6" RB vs.a 6'6", 290 lb DE who goes high in the first round, the blame does not lie with the player.
You better go back and revisit history regarding smith on third and short. He was just as effective as every other running back, in tough short yardage situations.
I think people are confusing 3rd down backs with 3rd-and-inches backs. Blocking and pass catching abilities are far more important than being a bruiser
I think that when we're under center it will be Hopkins/Shaw/Rawls and shotgun will be Smith/Shaw. And on 3rd downs that aren't short yardage situations it will be Smith.
Hopefully we can recruit a John Clay in this class or next. I wouldn't mind seeing a 245 lb. bruiser to compliment Denard or Devin.
What a coincidence wyatt shallman is listed at 245 lbs.
Edit: This was supposed to be the Dudeness post about it being Shaw and Smith.
I agree 100% with this. Though I also say that if he is in fact a real person, Fitzgerald Toussaint has a chance.
is he a real person lol. Omg you would think with his flambouyant name that they made it up to scare people. Fitzgerald Touissant i think i spelled it right. The really funny thing is people turn a blind eye to the our running backs slaughtering garbage teams. In fact if you look close the bowling green game where he got caught from behind. Nobody had any big runs at least aside from denard. So could he be the real deal absolutley he could be the real deal. I think cox or shaw will be the feature guy and smith or the guy we have olny seen run twice will be the third down guy. Smith has very little breakaway speed so hell why not let fitz get a shot.
It's spelled Toussaint. (Think of the word "saint" - his name means "All Saints").
Fitz was coming off of a knee injury (and wearing a brace) so I'm not sure that's the best way to judge his speed (against BGSU compared to his actual top speed). Woolfolk would have gotten burned by a few MAC receivers a few months ago as well. Rivals had him at 4.5 out of high school, that's pretty fast.
My $$ is on V Smith although Hayes could make waves there too. Being that the position is decided so soon into camp I'd have to guess Smith. Seems like Fitz is gonna get buried on the depth chart but who knows. Dang, I like that kid though.
Third Down: Smith/Hayes
Short Yardage: Rawls/Hopkins
Third down back assumes 3&long. Please read the damn thread.
Maybe you should read the thread again, nowhere in the OP's statements does it say 3rd and long back. It says 3rd down back which is pretty wide open for interpretation.
Maybe you should read his comment again. He didn't say read the OP he said read the thread, where the difference has been explained.
Before I posted there was no mention of 3rd and short or 3rd and long anywhere in the thread, just 3rd down back. That left it wide open to your own interpretation of what the OP meant.
95% have the same idea of a third down back. 5% seem to have no concept of what frequently happens on third and long. 3&long is what people talk about for a third down back. I'm sorry if I upset you that you do not know the difference between a third down back and an all purpose back.
People who actually watch football know what a 3rd down back is. 3rd-and-short back is the same thing as a goal line back and it is nearly the opposite of what a 3rd down back is. Realistically your regular running back should be big and tough enough to pick up 3rd and short if your base formation is the I-form or pro-set, so the short yardage back is extremely rare.
Yeah I've never watched a game of football that's why I created an account on a board mainly aimed at football that I don't watch...seriously some of you guys on here are your own worst enemies. You're always right and no ones opinion is right except yours.
Do you realize how hypocritical you are? Multiple people have told you that a third down back is not the same as a short yardage back and you refuse to realize that YOU are the one that is wrong. Instead you complain about others thinking only their opinion is right. Well in this case their opinion us right!
You're a douche. Just my opinion. And you can't spell worth monkey shit.
for noting that I said the thread. Not reading the thread is what I expect on mlive where the comments make me wish for mass extinction. Until the last year or so, it was not like that on here.
People like you make the board that way. Someone posts an opinion and because it's not in agreement with yours it's wrong. If you don't like my opinion then skip my replies, it's pretty easy.
Expect one of those freshman to start. If we had a starting caliber halfback on the roster he would've established himself by now. Remember we still have the same RB coach we had last year he knows what these guys are capable of
Third Down: Smith
I always thought vinny could bring something special to this ball club.
Vincent Smith ought to be the 3rd down back. That's what he should have been his whole career.
Smith has the bulk and strength to be our short yardage power back. Put in the jumbo package near the goal line. May be tougher against the bigger teams in the B1G but against most of our non conference opponents a 3rd down or short yardage back will have success.
You honestly see Smith as a short yardage power back? I would prefer any other back (except Hayes) as our short yardage power back. Smith would be a great third down back though.
Smiths 2010 performance bears this out. He was way more effective in short yardage situations than you give him credit for.
"Smith has the bulk and strength to be our short yardage power back..."?
"Smith has the bulk and strength to be our short yardage power back..."?
3rd down: Smith
Cox and Hopkins get spot duty, but I see Cox getting more reps if Shaw isn't getting it done.
Best oblique RR criticism ever?
This made me laugh heartily.
Well, Vincent Smith was 7-for-11 on converting 3rd and 3 or shorter into first downs on hand offs....and at least a couple of the misses were due to famously poor execution in front of him.
3D: V. Smith
So they're not going to tell us who this 3rd-down back is? And it's going to be made clear at the first game?
God, I hope not! That'll mean we're in more than a couple 3rd-and-long situations. Against Western. I'd rather not see that, thanks.
I think, given the context, Smith has to be the 3rd down back, where he will serve very well. I think that Cox will win the starting job and Shaw will be the guy who gets the 10-or-so carries per game. I also think that we will see Hopkins at FB and I'm hoping he can sort of play a BJ Askew role (I always liked Askew more than Perry).
I think we'll have a guy that carries the load, but I still think there is going to be a lot of situational running.
1. Thomas Rawls
2. Mike Cox (bare with me on this one...because I think he's the odd man out)
1. Mike Shaw/Fitz Toussaint
Short-yardage Back/Running FB:
1. Stephan Hopkins
3rd Down Back:
1. Vincent Smith
2. Justice Hayes
...now, I think Hayes won't get enough carries to be worth burning a RS...so remove him. I'm not sure you need a "backup 3rd down back" as that player is really only playing on 3rd and medium and 3rd and long. If it's 3rd and short, you have your short yardage guy in (Hopkins).
Also, I put Cox in the "starter" category, but that's just because he 1. didn't fit elsewhere, and 2. because the backup to that "position" isn't getting any carries unless it's a blowout.
So that leaves you with.
Starter (20-25 carries):
1. Thomas Rawls
Speed Back (7-10 carries):
1. Mike Shaw/Fitz Toussaint
Short-yardage Back/Running FB (situational):
1. Stephan Hopkins
3rd Down Back (situational):
1. Vincent Smith
When I say speed back, I mean a lot of the speed, get to the edge plays, BUT ALSO, we're going to run some 2-back "pro-set" stuff (actually SDSU ran A LOT of it) with the Speed Back and the Running FB each offset to the right and left of the QB. Or Shotgun, 2RB stuff using the same personnel. (That's where Houma fits in as a RB/FB ala BJ Askew).
That battle for speed back should be a good one. And maybe that person because so good that HE becomes the starter. If that's the case, I'm guessing you'd move Shaw/Fitz to starter, leave the other one a speed back, and redshirt Rawls along with Hayes. The situational spots seem set.
This position scares the hell out of me. Great guys but other then the true freshmen, the others were entirely unable to establish themselves as the feature back last year. Could be scheme-related and maybe one will shine but I am scares. Here's how I see the field:
V. Smith - If he can regain his pre- injury form he will likely start initially. He is actually pretty shifty, and catches the ball nicely both out of the backfield and on the short yardage stuff. His biggest problem is that he is never going to bowl anyone over but in late 2009, he showed some ability to get yards after contact. I actually think that smith will benefit from not running the Zone read. Too many times last year he was brought down right after taking the handoff. Having the RB set up behind he qb, instead of next to him, should benefit smith, who is shifty but lacks initial burst. Bottom line - should be adequate and maybe even fairly good but low ceiling.
Shaw - he came in with some hype and dumped of good speed. Injuries played a part but he has never really shown the ability to be an every down back. For his size (and he added some weight), he vandals a hit and block ok. But lacking real shiftiness, speed or size, I don't see him as the starter.
Hopkins - love his size, and his recruiting profile spoke of great speed for a big man. Throw out last year since e was a true freshman. I hunk he has potential in this offense, but e is an unknown quantity now. Prediction - he plays some at fb and is te "short yArdage" back. May increase reps over the season if he comes along. He has a high ceiling as a clay type of back. Still unknown.
Cox - I have always thought that his combo of siZe and speed was the most interesting but at this point my dreams of him being Minor Rage 2.0 have faded. I don't see him being the guy.
Fitz - you all know the story, potential galore. A cross between Chris Perry, Mike Hart, a Puma, Superman and Tom Beady (I know not a RB but it can never be a bad thing to be crossed with Tom Brady genes). But, his injuries seem like They will get the best of him and like cox, I don't see him bronchus guy.
Now for he two frehman.
Rawls - seems like Jackson and Borges love this guy, he can e a true north south runner but with enough juke ability to make people miss. I love his potential bit he probably needs a year of red-shirting to gain polish. That said this guy could take over the job mid-season. highest ceiling of all of these guys In this offense.
Hayes - while he is the higher rated of our freshmen RB tandem, it seems like Rawls has gotten more attention. This kid's speed could make him a great change of pace to Rawls. He could be a great homerun threat. But I don't see him starting this year - he will need a hear of. Strength and conditioning.
Those are my thoughts. Likel hat Vince is the starter with Hopkins playing the role of short yardage and fb. Shaw may get some carries, and Rawls may come on by mid season.