O-Line - Jordan Diamond and the Washington Duo

Submitted by NOLA Blue on

A nice piece on Jordan Diamond from Sporting News regarding his selection and commitment to the new Semper Fidelis All-American Bowl.  They have him as the #19 player in the nation, and are very high on his personality off the field.  I really hope we can land this young man.

In continuing the trend of being very high on off-field personality, Rivals has a nice article about Mr. Banner and Mr. Garnett.  They mention twice that the two are considering going to the same school.  Looking at their lists, that would pare it down to Cal, Michigan, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, Oregon, USC and Washington.  Any way you slice it, that's a pretty good final 7.

Two 5-star O-linemen in the fold already, with the possibility of adding one, maybe two... three?!

Go Blue!

andrewG

July 12th, 2011 at 1:25 PM ^

there may or may not have been a moment of utter horror after i clicked save but before the screen cleared and i realized my mistake.

but thanks for the intentional joke excuse; i'll be sure to save that one for a later date. not that i'll ever need it because my spelling is perfect...

CRex

July 12th, 2011 at 11:29 AM ^

I get your point, but 8 in one class has issues of people sitting on the bench.  With Morris we're likely not taking Morris and some other 5* in the same year.  I'd love ot have all 8 because I love depth on the lines, but realistically I think we'd start to see decommits at that point.  These kids need playing time to make it ot the next level and 8 in one class means no playing time for some of them.

dutchmen

July 12th, 2011 at 11:35 AM ^

why wouldnt u want morris hes a for sure four star and maybe even a 5 star. and denard will be gone and gardner will be a jr or sr depending if hes gets that injury red shirt by the time morris is here. and morris can red shirt his first year so he losses one year at max.

iawolve

July 12th, 2011 at 12:34 PM ^

Yes, we need a big bump now to make up for poor numbers previously, but we can also assume Hoke will have a more even spread to ease issues created from graduation as well.  The same holds true for defense  where I am pretty sure we won't see next year's class dominated by DE and LB commits (DT may be a different story depending on who ends up signing with us when this class closes).

NOLA Blue

July 12th, 2011 at 11:56 AM ^

In all honesty, I'm hoping we take them all and get rid of a few of our Top 100 linebackers.  Then again, that is probably because I am hoping Michigan unveils the 2 - 1 - 8 on defense this year, and I just don't see any reason to take more than 2 LBs if that is the case.

I would also like to throw my hat in the ring for BlueintheFace's suggestion of "Manball" with 10 OL and a QB.  I am unable to see how Michigan would fail such a scheme with Denard at the helm of what would essentially be a barge designed to deliver touchdowns.

Also, I will be accepting votes for the Heisman in 2012.  I have not yet decided my position... too many questions regarding formations still floating around.

Thank you.  That is all.

MichTits

July 12th, 2011 at 11:25 AM ^

Its just too bad that we wouldn't take all three.  It might be a stretch to say that we would take two of the three.  Crazy to say that when talking about 5* players, but not a bad problem to have.

IncognitoWolverino

July 12th, 2011 at 11:26 AM ^

I really hope we get Diamond to close out the O-Line class this year. We're gona have to let some good ones slide, but this year is so stacked with talent, it's a good problem to have (as long as we're still getting our top choices).

But seriously, you could build a formidable team with this year's class.

IncognitoWolverino

July 12th, 2011 at 12:48 PM ^

Purely hypothetical here: what if one of the classes lower rated OL guys sees the competition he'll be working against and decides he'll have a better shot at PT elsewhere? I'm not encouraging anyone to decommit, but I think it is a reasonable posibility to consider since we have so long until signing day (Although I'm sure our declining O-line depth would make this unlikely).

maizedandconfused

July 12th, 2011 at 1:25 PM ^

A single OL recruit that we have that wont be competitive for playing time. 

1. Assuming these guys all red shirt, in the 2012/13, if Lewan leaves early, there will be 4 scholarship linemen ahead of this class. 4. Now, assuming no attrition, that leaves almost all 5 spots up for grabs.

2. Everyone we have signed is, in my opinion, a potential starter.

Braden and Bars need some weight room time but might be good ones. I see Bars at OG and Braden at WOT.

Magnusson and Kalis will almost guarenteed be starters, Kalis at OG and Magnusson in the mix with Posada and Schofield for the SOT.

So, as an incoming OL recruit, assuming Diamong is going to be a guard, the question is, in your sophmore year do you want to compete with 3 people for 2 spots.

Farnn

July 12th, 2011 at 11:32 AM ^

They stress that conditioning and athletic ability is important to them, maybe Banner could play TE.  That would be a fun matchup in the red zone.

turtleboy

July 12th, 2011 at 11:34 AM ^

now that we have 5 OL commits I think Diamond is a better fit somewhere else than for our last spot. He'd bring depth to the roster, but Magnuson is already ahead of Diamond in their similar skillsets and has a higher cieling to my eye, so Diamond would be competing with soon-to-be 4 star Braden for playtime if he committed. Garnett can do everything Diamond does (run block) and fits better inside as a projected Guard, while Banner is a taller passblocking LT prospect and diversifies our 2012 OL skillset and size. I think Diamond is a bit like Kalis in that he's called a Tackle, but has stronger Guard skills than Tackle skills. I wish he would've committed earlier because he's a great prospect.

WolvinLA2

July 12th, 2011 at 11:40 AM ^

Seriously man, some of your comments about OL are completely out of left field.  We need another tackle, Diamond is a tackle, and a good one, and we'd be thrilled to have him.  It doesn't make it any less important now that it's later in the process. 

So what if we have Magnuson?  When Lewan graduates, it would be nice to have more than one guy who can play LT if needed.  Diamond can play both, and he's good.  We want him, I promise.

turtleboy

July 12th, 2011 at 12:28 PM ^

sound like I'm giving my opinion, but this is not out of left field, here is why: The coaches have already done something similar 3 times in the last 2 months to 3 top 100 players. The coaches ended up slow playing Pittman and telling Odenigbo his position was full and we also missed out on Wayne Morgan just because of redundancy at position. We still could end up taking 2 DE's yet we passed on Pittman and Odenigbo, and we still took 2 DBs after we parted ways with top talent Morgan. Not because they weren't good enough, but because Morgan was too close to Richardson and Standifer in position, and because Odenigbo and Pittman played the same spot or the same style as Ojemudia and Brown. Think about it. We needed multiple DEs and DBs, they were DEs and DBs who were interested, and yet the coaches backed off of them. I think Diamond has too similar a skillset to other kids we already have and the same thing thats already happened 3 times might happen again with him. It's no more a knock onDiamond than it is on Pittman, Odenigbo, and Morgan. I would have loved to have all 4 of those talented kids in this class but the first 3 were too late, Diamond might be too, especially if he waits until after this season to decide.

WolvinLA2

July 12th, 2011 at 12:32 PM ^

But the case with Odenigbo and Morgan, the guys at their spot committed before them. If Odenigbo committed before Brown or if Morgan committed before Standifer, things might be different. There are grades rumors with Pittman, so who knows there.

Unlike the situations you listed, we actually want another tackle.

turtleboy

July 12th, 2011 at 1:04 PM ^

as well who's to say those 2 top 100 DE's wouldn't grow into SDEs in time? Their position is fluid too. They also were in early on Sheldon Day and Jaleel Johnson but they backed off of them and now favor Pipkins and OBrien, their "spot" has not filled up. It seems that we agree that for the most part there's a difference between WDE and SDE, but disagree on whether or not there's a difference between LG and RG or LT and RT (and to some extent between Guard and Center.) While I know that OLine players move around regularly and grow into positions, you can't say that it happens any more so than it does with DEs. Some Guards can make a switch to Center, while most Centers are taken exclusively to be Centers, and while many Tackles are tweeners and switch sides, quite often coaches look for 1 prototype prospect to be the LT. Some coaches take 2 regular DT's while others look for a true NT for their line. A similar argument applies to RBs. There are many types of RBs, but the coaches might not want to take 2 speed backs, or 2 powerbacks, or 2 elusive backs in the same class, but they're all called RBs.They've been backing off of top prospects for a while now for subtle reasons, taking a Tackle whos an excellent pass blocker over a 3rd Tackle who still needs to learn is a less than subtle distinction. It's not pure madness to imagine it happening.  Since the class is filling up by position I expect the coaches to increase their pickyness over who they take to round it out. 

WolvinLA2

July 12th, 2011 at 1:12 PM ^

Fine, agree to disagree I guess. I think you're overplaying the difference between a LT and RT for 17 year olds, and those spots are a lot more interchangeable than a SDE and WDE in our defense.

Also, agree to disgaree that Diamond isn't a good fit for our last OL spot. I think he'd be a perfect fit and I'd be thrilled to have him.

turtleboy

July 12th, 2011 at 1:24 PM ^

 nor did I imply that he'd never work out for our team, I pointed that his skill set is similar to guys we already have, and similarly lacking in one essential area still. My point on differences in Linemen is that the LT needs to be a good passblocker, in fact, the best one on the team, and while Magnuson, Braden, and Diamond are all great prospects, pass blocking is something that all 3 of them need to learn. The coaches MAY prefer to take a 17 year old who already excels at that necessary skill instead of eventually settling on which one of those 3 mentioned ultimately learn it the best.

maizedandconfused

July 12th, 2011 at 1:30 PM ^

These kids need to learn to passblock for one reason. Also, highschool pass blocking is stupid, because QBs are 1. inconsitent in their dropbacks and 2. they take forever to get the ball out (assuming you dont have a top 250 QB slinging for your team)

If I was a high school coach with top 250 OL that was 6'6 and 300lbs i'd never pass the ball once. 

NOT. ONCE.

redhousewolverine

July 12th, 2011 at 1:45 PM ^

Although, I do think space played more of an impact in the "turning away" (which is a rumor), what is the citeria for enrolling early? The reason I ask is because couldn't a kid do well enough in his school to graduate early, but not have a high enough score on the ACT/SAT to qualify for college? Would have to have a low standard high school, though. Also, doesn't State have similar if no the same exact criteria for academic admissions for football players (NCAA minimum)? So that more than enrolling early would indicate grades probably weren't as big of a problem. Also, does anyone know about Pittman's school? Maybe his school is questionable, so the staff didn't want to risk one of the last spots in the class on him.