RB recruit Stephen Hopkins changing position to LB
Stephen (pronounced Stefan) Hopkins has been the starter at running back since Erwin took over, but Hopkins will most likely see more snaps playing linebacker then running back in 2009.
link
http://www.championsportsradio.com/blog/?p=477
August 23rd, 2009 at 2:56 PM ^
Will he be a LB for us then?
August 23rd, 2009 at 6:19 PM ^
i was told he was "adding" a position instead of "changing." i think he probably still comes in as an RB.
August 23rd, 2009 at 2:57 PM ^
in the "Friday Night Lights" post
http://mgoblog.com/content/friday-night-lights-09-junior-wrapup
August 23rd, 2009 at 2:59 PM ^
my bad - didn't see that link.
neg as deemed appropriate
August 23rd, 2009 at 3:02 PM ^
It's an interesting development worth discussing and it's not as egregious where there is already a thread on the board.
I'm definitely curious to see how good he is on D even though I like him as a RB.
August 23rd, 2009 at 5:13 PM ^
are you speaking in the first or third person?
August 23rd, 2009 at 3:47 PM ^
Unless he excels into a mid to high-level four star prospect at the LB position after his senior year, I dont count on him coming to UM as a LB..if he wants to play LB he will more than likely decommit..UM wants him as a big back..
August 23rd, 2009 at 3:58 PM ^
I see no issuewith a 3-star level recruit adding a position his sr. year. More than likely he will redshirt next year, and that gives him and the coaching staff a year to evaluate him as a potential RB or LB (much like Ezeh).
If Anthony Barr commits, and Kinard is not a MLB... that may be his best shot at seeing the field
August 23rd, 2009 at 4:32 PM ^
Barr is going to ND barring (no pun intended) a total collapse in ND's season and Weis being fired. With Mike Cox really emerging this fall, perhaps Michigan coaches asked Hopkins to try out LB and see how that works. Not so sure we need to take a power back in this class anymore since Cox has fully committed to the program and has really stepped up his game.
August 23rd, 2009 at 10:32 PM ^
And you're basing this assumption on Cox REALLY stepping up his game and committing to the program on what exactly? A solid scrimmage against the 2's and 3's yesterday? Right now he's the last running back on the depth chart not named Potempa. I'd be surprised to see him get any reasonable minutes this fall.
August 23rd, 2009 at 10:40 PM ^
Mike Cox is not last on the depth chart. He won the workout warrior award and if it wasn't for BM and CB he would get a lot of carries.
August 24th, 2009 at 1:51 AM ^
Our depth at RB could be the main reason we don't hear Mike's name more often.
We've had a lack of good news this year, so everyone (including me) is looking for any good reports from the newest recruits. Even though he is relatively new, Cox is fighting his way back into the limelight after last year's early attention was placed on McGuffie and Shaw (and Minor later in the season).
I think he deserves more time to show what he can do. Unfortunately for him, there are a decent number of guys ahead of him, as we are nowhere near lacking at the position. I think next year we will need his services more.
That's not to say that we shouldn't take Hopkins, but it will be interesting to see how it plays out if Cox gets opportunities this year and does well.
August 23rd, 2009 at 3:59 PM ^
It will be especially interesting to consider this move to LB if we get Eduardo Clements.
August 23rd, 2009 at 5:19 PM ^
Hopkins is a big bruiser. Clements is 5'10" and 185. If Michigan's coaches wanted a bunch of scat backs in this class, they wouldn't have offered Hopkins in the first place.
Clements shouldn't have any effect on Hopkins or vice versa.
August 23rd, 2009 at 5:21 PM ^
I think some of you are reading too much into this.
Hopkins isn't switching solely to LB - he's going to be playing LB in addition to RB. Some of you may not know this, but lots of high school players play both ways. Just because Hopkins is going to be playing some defense this year doesn't mean that Rodriguez is dictating what position he plays for his high school team.
August 23rd, 2009 at 5:44 PM ^
while i do recognize that he might be playing both ways, it is a possibility that the UM coaching staff had some input on the position adjustment. Perhaps kids at a big time football h.s. care more about what is "best for the team," but i can tell you that if I have a scholarship offer from a big-time D1 program, I am putting all of my focus and attention into the position that they intend for me to play. Unless the UM coaching staff told me that they want me to try things out at LB, I personally would be against playing dual positions, and focus singularly on RB.
August 23rd, 2009 at 5:58 PM ^
I don't know any statistics, but you may be in the minority. All the FBS recruits I've been teammates with and/or seen come through programs I've been involved with have played both ways, except a quarterback or two (for obvious reasons).
I don't have time to do much research, but if you look at our recruits from this year, many (if not most) play both ways. Jerald Robinson plays WR/S, Marvin Robinson plays RB/S, Ricardo Miller is going to play WR/LB, Drew Dileo plays RB/WR/CB, D.J. Williamson plays WR/CB. I believe Ken Wilkins plays some TE in addition to DE, but I could be wrong. I think Gardner and Cornelius Jones just play QB (for obvious reasons). And I'm not sure about Tony Drake, but considering his high school program, he might just not be good enough to play defense.
August 24th, 2009 at 1:23 AM ^
I agree 110%. i know a dude who played for Muskegon High School. got offered for GVSU. he played both sides. Lots of big recruits have. RoJo played both sides. if you are good enough why not? especially if it can draw more interest to you.
August 23rd, 2009 at 6:08 PM ^
has nothing to do with him playing at UM. this was his HS coach's and his decision.
August 23rd, 2009 at 8:32 PM ^
In HS you tend to put your best players/atheletes on the field as much as possible.
August 23rd, 2009 at 9:28 PM ^
Don't you think it would make more sense to play multiple positions to improve your all around game? The best players are usually "just football players" and should be able to play multipe posistions. Unless, you have a guy like Tate that's been eating QB 101 since he was in diapers.
August 23rd, 2009 at 6:40 PM ^
As long as he's just adding a position, I don't think it can be a bad thing. Remember that our last two middle linebackers were RBs in high school.
August 23rd, 2009 at 8:01 PM ^
I dont understand what the deal is here. He is probably the teams best athlete and they are using him to the fullest. He's not coming in to play LB at all, RR didnt ask for him to do this. His coach just realizes that him playing offense and defence gives him the best chance to win. End of story.
August 23rd, 2009 at 9:02 PM ^
The deal here is that Hopkins is an unknown quantity at LB. Maybe he's really good, who knows. If he excels as a senior at LB, you'd think they'd look at him there given the obvious need. In absence of that, yeah, you bring him at his original position, Big RB.
This whole thread is hypothetical, in my opinion.
August 24th, 2009 at 9:04 AM ^
In high school, many programs put you in a position that helps the H.S. team wins, regardless of whether it is good for a players development to the next level. This is especially true at smaller schools. Not saying this is the case at a big time Texas program, but I especially see it here in Michigan. You always see kids who are built to be linebackers forced to play on the d line due to lack of size in H.S. This is the same reason most kids with talent will play both ways. It also shows their versatility to D1 programs and may help with their recruiting.