So once again I am watching the replay of the ND game and I can't get over how well Devin Gardner played. He really is a unique quarterback with his size and speed. Dare I say he reminds me of Colin Kaepernick? Anyway, I was wondering what everyones thoughts were on the coaching staff recruiting a dual-threat quarterback. If Devin has a breakout year, maybe they change their minds on only recruting pro-style qb's? We are continuing to see in college and the NFL that having a true dual-threat qb is such a great asset. Thoughts?
Recruiting Dual-Threat QB's
It's not that the coaches are thinking, "Man, we really need a guy that can't move back there." It's that they are looking for a guy that is a passer first. If they can get a guy that they think can hit all the throws and read all the defenses and then is a running threat as well, of course they'll take that guy. But more likely they will find a guy that can move a little bit and do the things they require of a QB. That's why they took a guy like Morris, not because he's just bad enough at running that Michigan should bring him on board, but because they believe he can do the things they require from the position and he isn't a terrible athlete on top of it.
Wilton Speight doesn't really strike me as a guy that can "move around a little bit."
The Michigan staff feels he meets the requirements for the position. Speight can actually move in the pocket pretty well, so he can "move a little bit". He may not be a threat to pick up many yards with his legs, but that's not part of the requirement, it's an added bonus. You take that bonus when you can get it, but you make sure you meet the requirements first.
What you're basically calling for is for Michigan to recruit the best player. Well yeah. Why doesn't Michigan recruit more 6'5" WRs that run in the 4.3s and have great hands? Why not more 6'2" CBs that can flip their hips and are physical with good ball skills? Well, they have requirements for each position, that a recruit must be able to meet. If a 5'10" CB meets those requirements great, if the CB is 6'2" even better.
I guess the question is how much arm is one willing to sacrifice for legs? Also how much do the coaches feel they can improve a player's passing to gain innate running abilities? From the offers so far, it seems they want all arm and best possible mechanics they can find from high schoolers. To be honest, I'm not sure they would have recruited Gardner out of high school. He had terrible mechanics and was almost all athleticism as a prospect. Big arm, but still raw as hell.
Depending on other guys, but I certainly don't think he would have been first choice. I mean, the thing with Gardner is that, for as good as he is now, there was also a very realistic chance that he was going to remain a very raw and unpolished QB. Yeah, taking a risk on a guy can really pay off, and it can probably pay off more in other systems (such as in Rich Rod's offense, where there was more priority on his legs). But if you take Gardner and he doesn't pan out as a passer in Borges's offense, well, we've kind of seen what can happen to the offense.
So it's a balance of risk/reward. It appears to have worked out very well with Gardner. But perhaps the staff thinks there are other QBs that offer a similar reward with a much smaller risk. But if they saw a guy with Gardner's upside but better mechanics in HS, you better believe they'd recruit him because of the high reward and minimal risk. It's just that that doesn't really happen often. Usually they are more like Gardner was coming out of HS.
I absolutely think Gardner would have been recruited by Hoke and Co. if they were around for the class of 2010. Perhaps he wouldn't have been their ideal quarterback, but that class of QB's wasn't great overall. When you have a prospect who's that good in your own backyard, you give it a shot. If it doesn't work, he could always play WR.
So I assume you're correct. But I think my point still stands as a basic rule of thumb. They are minimizing risk for what they believe will be the perceived reward.
But, that's why they appear genuinely interested in Dillman. He gives the extra reward with his leg but he at least comes close to meeting the requirements with his arm as well. Whether it's enough isn't certain yet, but they are certainly entertaining it.
But to agree partially with your point, I was talking merely as recruiting Gardner as a QB. There is no doubt in my mind this staff would recruit Gardner as an athlete at least. If they are offering Cole in a small class as an ATH (and this isn't a shot at Cole, but praise for Gardner), then Gardner, who I believe had All-American potential as a WR, would certainly get offered in any class.
In response to some other comments on this board, Alabama has taken risks on more mobile type QBs and most of them didn't pan out the way they were hoping. Now they appear to not be taking that risk as often. Of course, if they could get AJ McCarron but with better legs they would, but it's the same balancing act for them as well. You make that balancing act based on the offense and the requirements of the position within that offense. That's the overall point I was trying to make.
But, Alabama can take more risks like that because of oversigning. If Michigan could take 5 extra kids each class and then cut the ones that don't work out, I would think they would take more risks on athlete first or raw type players.
but google digs up a Stewart Mandel (I know, I know) article about the weak 2010 QB class.
"This year, by contrast, the site doesn't rank a single quarterback among its top 50 prospects.
"I've been doing this since 1992, and I can't ever remember a weaker quarterback group," said Rivals.com national recruiting analystJamie Newberg. "If someone's looking for a guy to come in next year and be the savior, there just isn't anyone.""
Top guys were Jake Heaps, Phil Sims, Connor Wood, Paul Jones, Jesse Scroggins, Blake Bell, Tyler Bray, Devin Gardner, Andrew Hendrix, Tommy Rees... Not exactly a who's who of world-beaters, as a group. There are 2, maybe 3, guys who panned out (Gardner included, of course).
That was a weak class. Devin will likely turn out to be the best one.
Rob Bolden, as well. With him and Devin both being from Michigan, I don't think there is any doubt Hoke and Co. would have recruited Gardner over Bolden, who was seen by some to be just as good, if not better of a prospect that Devin.
We should have taken Tommy Rees.
Look no further than their first QB. Bellomy wasn't Denard running but was a dual threat with mediocre arm strength. There seems to be no pre-req with these guys, they seem to be taking a variety of skill sets, with leadership being very important. That last part is why I am certain they would've gone after Devin.
Wasn't he part of Hoke's first recruiting class when Hoke and his staff had less than a month to put the class together?
Yeah I think Bellomy's recruitment was more a product of circumstances, not philosophy.
Mid-to-lower tier BCS type of recruit, which is why he was committed to Purdue initially. In most cycles Michigan wouldn't have offered him, but they needed a QB in the class and took the best option that fit what they wanted in a QB the most.
That said, Bellomy is still a mid-tier quality QB type, which is why I get so frustrated when people claim that he just completely sucks. Yes, as a RS freshman playing on the road, at night, in an extremely hostile environment he looked bad. Frankly, his skill set isn't through the roof. But he can add good depth to this team and can play spot duty or start on occasion if the need arises and he continues to improve on a standard trajectory for him. Just an aside for why I get upset when people already throw him under the bus for not being great already.
Look no further than their first QB. Bellomy wasn't Denard running but was a dual threat with mediocre arm strength. There seems to be no pre-req with these guys, they seem to be taking a variety of skill sets, with leadership being very important. That last part is why I am certain they would've gone after Devin.
I think the coaches feel they can get the best WRs and RBs and not really need the speed at QB. I'm sure the coaches will try to recruit the Gardners that come thru. Would they recuit Braxton Miller? I don't think so.
we ARE getting basically that best CB in Jabrill Peppers.
But then I guess the point is why isn't Michigan getting two Jabrill Peppers to fill out their CB class?
Yes, I just tried to imagine that too.
I was going to say the same thing. If they can get a Gardner-type, who showed enough promise in HS throwing the ball that a number of major programs were looking at him at QB, then they'll take him. RGIII would have been a good fit as well, even though he was never a fantastic runner.
I suspect that the preference will be on throwing over running, so that means guys like Denard come in at positions like Norfleet/athelte versus at QB, but I definitely think Hoke and Borges realize that having a guy with some real mobility in the backfield is great provided he can make the necessary throws.
As long as the guy isn't John Navarre, it'll be fine.
I think of quarterbacks like Tom Brady or Andrew Luck. They have great arms and are passers first... but they can move in the pocket to avoid pressure and pick up first downs when the middle opens up with their legs. Hell, Luck won a game with his legs last week.
Our current recruits may not be able to circle out of a pocket and juke a couple guys.. but they'll have plenty of targets that can do that with the ball in their hands once they get them the ball.
Coyote makes a good point. Devin Gardner is a unicorn. He has the arm, the speed and high character and intelect, having all out of high school. Name someone else you can say that about: kappernick: unknown; Newton: not a leader, got kicked out of school; Rg3, did have the arm out of high school; Prior: character. No, it is really that Gardner is unique.
And to be fair Gardner did not look that good his first two years - he would get on the field, run around a lot, and heave passes in a very chunky fashion. It looked bad. I don't know what came over him, esp. since he was practing mostly as WR last year but whatever black magic thank the heavens.
What is a "Pro-Style quarterback" these day? I think they will recruit the best players that fit their scheme. Devin is a great passer who can run. I think they will look for those types when available. Dual-threat who isn't a good passer, not so much.
That's why I said TRUE dual-threat.
I don't need to use my toes to count the "true" elite dual threat quarterbacks that have come through the college ranks. They don't grow on trees. If we miss on those guys, who may come around once every couple of years, then the preference is a guy who can toss the ball around, not a guy who can Denard.
Are you inferring that you'd prefer a moderately viewed dual threat to a highly viewed pocket passer? If so, it's a legit argument, but I'd take the passer for our offense. Kaepernick was a 3* guy without any real offers, so your point may have validity, but QB is a position you don't want to take a chance on. For ever Kaepernick, there's likely dozens that could not carry an offense.
I guess the counter would be that UM shouldn't be afraid of taking a chance on guys like this as a second option. As you noted, many of these surprise successes are lightly regarded out of HS, so why not take a flyer on a great athlete who could turn into a good passer and, if not, still probably find a place at WR, RB, corner, etc. Honestly, it isn't any riskier than picking up a backup RB or lineman.
didn't get any offer beside Nevada is he was a great baseball player who was destined to get drafted at 1st round. Colleges felt that they didn't want to waste their time and resources on a player who is likely end up signing a MLB contract. Kaepernick had to call Coach Ault to convince him that he wants to play football and he hesitated for the reason stated above. He didn't get an offer, not because he sucks, it's because he's so good at baseball.
Have him grow up in our backyard too so he's inclined to come here.
that has the ability to buy time with his feet and even tuck and run if needed.
You should have printed out one of the last 15 conversations about this and put it next to your bed. The only prerequisite for playing QB at Michigan is the ability to drop dimes. Devin was successful on saturday because he did this. The coaches are more than ok with recruiting a dual threat as long as he can throw the ball. That's really all there is to it.
15 huh? My site search must have failed me because I didnt find anything on this subject. Unless the topic was buried in another thread title I didn't see this discussed anywhere.
"The only prerequisite for playing QB at Michigan is the ability to drop dimes. Devin was successful on saturday because he did this."
Your first sentence is a good one. The second one...not so much.
Devin was successful on Saturday because he could both run and throw. His ability to move in the pocket allowed him to make some throws that other guys couldn't. His ability to run gained him 80+ yards on the ground. His ability to run/audible helped him score that rushing TD when Hoke was trying to call a timeout.
I don't think the coaches are anti-dual threat quarterbacks, they just are trying to get the best guy for their system. I haven't heard of any dual threat options in 2015, but isn't Messiah deWeaver getting a lot of interest for 2016?
You're wrong on both counts. The coaches are taking strong looks at a number of dual-threat guys in 2015, including Kevin Dillman, Sheriron Jones, Brandon Wimbush, and Cinjun Erskine. They're also obviously going after "pro-style" (although I increasingly think "pro-style" is a misnomer when describing QBs that can't run very well) like Josh Rosen, Kyle Kearns, Brady White, Jack Beneventi, Alex Malzone, etc., but there are definitely dual threat options on the table in 2015.
Meanwhile, Messiah deWeaver is not a dual threat.
Brady White could be considered a dual threat, but he's so good at scrambling and then finding an open receiver, he rarely needs to run. He's a great looking QB prospect.
They're going to look kids who can make all the throws first. If the kid can also run, like Gardner, all the better, but a lot of high school "dual- threat" qbs really can't throw at all.
Look at Andrew luck. Most people wouldn't call him a dual-threat quarterback, but he's relatively effective at running the ball when he needs to, because he's fast enough, and defenses are more worried about his arm. I think he's the type of qb that would fit this staff's ideals more than Cam Newton, if you want to compare consecutive #1 picks.
I am totally in favor of Michigan recruiting a dual threat quarterback if the guy can actually throw. There's no reason not to recruit a dual-threat guy if he can do all the passing stuff AND run well.
I would not be in favor of Michigan recruiting another Denard Robinson (at least not for the QB position).
Serious question. With the increased desire to have dual threat quarterbacks, would pro-style quarterbacks become undervalued, and hence better quality? I know that quality per se won't change much, but with increased availability due to increased interest in dual threat qbs, would the pro-style qbs become easier to recruit (due to decreased demand) and higher quality with less top teams persueing them?
What about Braxton Miller?
I think these coaches would have recruited Braxton Miller like they've recruited a couple other "dual threat" quarterbacks. Offer them as safeties or wide receivers, and then watch them go somewhere else.
I agree, the running ability is deadly to have, but as we've seen with denard, only if you have the ability to throw accurately. People also seem to forget how rare guys like kaepernick and devin and Russell Wilson are. I'm sure if the staff can land another devin Gardner they would, but these guys just don't come around that often.
Alabama seems to be doing pretty good with a pro-style quarterback...
seem to be doing pretty good with all-american lineman and an all-american defense too. Yeah we cant be comparing to them quite yet.
I would say first thing first is that they need someone with a plus arm. Mobility isn't a must have, but would be an added bonus. I don't think the staff would trade a plus arm for an average armed QB with legs. It just doesn't help out offensive philosophy. (i.e. LOOONG BALL!)
I'm sure if they could find another Devin, Hoke & Co. would gladly that him.
is a huge asset for the program today as we're still in the process of building our running game back to the power days. But we're not there yet. We need a QB who can make things happen with his legs. Going forward though, the coaches will not be concerned about that (recruiting a dual threat guy) as much once our OL, RB, WR, and TE ranks are filled with quality, experienced players and depth.
Shane Morris may not be labeled a "mobile quarterback", but he's more athletic than the average bear, and should be able to gain yards on scrambles and run some of the read option that Devin has had success with. Shane isn't Denard, but neither is Devin. The dropoff in QB scrambling ability from Devin to Shane will be apparent but not as dramtic as a lot of people expect.
"The dropoff in QB scrambling ability from Devin to Shane will be apparent but not as dramtic as a lot of people expect."
I don't agree. The dropoff will be dramatic. The offense might be just as successful because of an expected improvement in the offensive line, wide receivers, running backs, etc. And Morris might even be a better passer than Gardner. But as for scrambling and creating on his own, Morris won't be able to hold a candle to Gardner.
Agree. That bootleg where Tuitt is waiting for Gardner on the edge? That's a sack with Morris. Instead Gardner makes it a plus play because of his speed.
I think Henne is a perfect example of this. He showed somewhat surprising speed when he scrambled, which was rare.
Two times now, in one thread that I agree with you completely. Agree about not recruiting another Denard (for QB), and that the scrambling ability of Morris will not be anywhere near what Devin can do. Devin really isn't all that far behind Denard in his ability to run the football.
"The dropoff in QB scrambling ability from Devin to Shane will be apparent but not as dramtic as a lot of people expect." No, it will be VERY VERY apparent. Morris as a jr would have been sacked 5-6 times in that game. You are really understating what Devin did - he was pressured for long portions of that game and made something out of nothing repeatedly. ND's DL was gashing the interior of the line and bringing blitzes (esp early).
"The dropoff in QB scrambling ability from Devin to Shane will be apparent but not as dramtic as a lot of people expect."
Wholeheartedly disagree. Devin is a freak athlete, is deadly on a qb boot, can actually run and read the "read option". It won't even be close.
Accuracy. Still the gold standard. Luck and Kapernick are accurate and have escape ability which is a lethal combination.
Since pro's QBs were brought up, name the last "dual threat" to win a Super Bowl? Brady, Peyton, Rodgers are accurate and they are winning the big games. Also, Magnus mentioned AJ McCarron and you can't argue his success.
Kaepernick came really close...plus the dual threat guys are still young. Give it a few years and see what happens.
Although people don't usually think of him as a dual threat guy, Aaron Rodgers meets all the criteria. He's been one of the top three rushers on his team every year that he has been a starter, and he is excellent at extending plays and throwing on the run. So to answer your question, 2010 would be the last time a team won the with a dual threat QB.
Not really. Rodgers is not a dual threat QB. His arm pays the bills and wins games. He runs occasionally but they don't draw up many plays that feature him running.
If you are going to define dual threat so narrowly then of course no one will be able to come up with an example of one who won the superbowl. The zone read has barely been present in the NFL before the past two years. Dual threat means a threat to pass the ball or run it, which Aaron Rodgers absolutely is.
To nd without Devon's mobility.
But someone with less mobility but a better arm probably makes the 3rd and 5 roll out completion. Maybe he makes some other reads quicker or Michigan runs some different passing concepts. While Gardner's mobility in that game was a huge asset and bailed out Borges several times, it's not as clear cut as that. But mobility certainly helps in that regard, there is no denying that.
Your point is valid, but in either case, you are talking about a special QB. Making quick and accurate reads, and then delivering the ball on target with proper touch requires a very good QB. This type of player, or someone like Devin who has more mobility, is not easy to find.
I certainly agree with that
With the team we have now.
Only a handful of QBs would win that game for us. And they are all mobile. way too much pressure from ND DL for a traditional drop back to handle. unless he had Megatron avail..
You're assuming that we would game plan the same with a different QB, which almost certainly isn't the case.
Unless you switch to a Texas Tech air raid with quick 3 step drops the whole game.
Whats more likely, UM shift to Air Raid offense or UM have the same offense with a mobile QB to have a couple wrinkle plays (zone read, scramble for 1st downs..etc).
I forgot, running the option prob would work as a curve ball.
ND has a better OL, better DL , the next 4 best WRs (after Gallon) and Rees played a HELL of a game. Not many teams win that matchup playing traditional O. Luckily UM had the two biggest playmakres (DG, Gallon).
We lose that game without his accuracy.
DGs mobile, accurate and smart. The guy is awesome. However, DGs don't grow on trees and with the qualities we're talking about, we're talking 5* recruits as DG was.
It's a good question the OP posed. Either way, we're in good shape for the next few years.
Roger Staubach is a great example from the 70's of a mobile QB that could extend plays and bust 15 yard gains. He won 2 Super Bowls and almost won 2 others. Roger also had to retire in '80 after suffering 325 concussions, give or take, so I guess there's that.
...name the last "dual threat" to win a Super Bowl?
That is irrelevant. How many Michigan QBs have won a Super Bowl? How many have even pro-bowelers? Tom Brady, then...? I'm sure there are others but my point is that NFL success has little to do with collegiate succes. Let's go after the Trent Dilfers of the world then...
Dual Threat QBs with great accuracy are an asset that Hoke and Co should absolutely try to get on campus.
Daryll Clark, Troy Smith, RG3, Tahj Boyd, EJ Manueal, Johnny Manziel, etc. I have no idea whether they would go after guys with that skillset or not but they definately should.
I'm a pro-boweler.
Elvis Grbac was a Pro-Boweler...er...Pro-Bowler.
Pretty sure Brian Greise went once after two or three other QBs declined invitations.
I don't see a problem in us going after dual threat guys, as long as their primary decision is to beat the other team with their arm. Then, if they can tuck it and run if need be, that's just icing on the cake. Ideally, I'd want a taller Russell Wilson as my type of QB going forward: a guy who can make all the throws, but can bolt if everything breaks down.
It'd be great to have QBs like Gardner going forward, and from what we've seen, Morris is not a statue in the backfield, either. But our offense is building to the point where we won't necessarily need a dual threat guy. We'll have plenty of threats on the field to the point where a dual threat QB is almost overkill. Granted, I never want a guy who's going to be immobile in the backfield, but at least someone who can move around and buy a little time. They don't need to be Denard or Devin in terms of their athleticism.
Russell Wilson is a successful NFL QB and you want a taller version of him for a college QB. People need to stop hating on Wilson for his height. I'll take the 5'11" version of Wilson as our college QB because he's doing a great job in the NFL right now. A taller version of Wilson is E.L.I.T.E and on par with Newton level prospect. Yeah that's the ideal, but I'm not ready to pass on a Wilson-type player because of his height
you would pass on RW due to his height, only that a 6'2"+ version of RW would be better than the 5'11" version. i.e. Shaun Crawford seems an awesome prospect and good get for M at 5'8"-5'-10" but would be a 5* at 6'0" or above.
I'm not hating on Russell Wilson. I'd kill to have a QB like that play for Michigan, regardless of his height. He's mobile, can make all the throws, really accurate, and perhaps most importantly, is mature beyond his years. He makes smart decisions with the football.
I'm just saying that, in the ideal world, I'd want a prospect that's slightly taller than however tall Russell Wilson is now. Russell Wilson is an amazing QB, and guys like him and Drew Brees show that height isn't everything. But it damn sure counts for something.
I think so.
Not to put words in the OP's mouth but I think when he says dual threat he wants a guy who can actually run a zone read, pull, and pick up 15yds once or twice a game. Doesn't have to be Gardner. Forcier could do that.
I too would actually like a QB who can move..and I mean more than just move in the pocket to by time (Rees was great at extending the play).
I'd like a QB that can get 3rd downs by checking down to "run" and picking up that 3rd and 7 when he gets past his second read. Henne, Navarre for example could not do that. if the play wasn't executed at all levels then it didn't work.
I don't think we need/want: Dennis Dixon, Denard, Tebow, Braxton Miller...etc. no arms.
But: Forcier, Manziel, Wilson, Taji Boyd, Troy Smith all fit the bill IMO.
IMO, it takes that to win it all unless you recurit like Bama (or old USC) and not even Hoke has done that yet (but he his close). A playmaker at QB can make up for potential shortcomings at WR or OL or RB.
In the BCS era, really outside of Bama and LSU all teams have had a somehwat mobile QBs. With guys in the trenches like Bama and LSU you can have just about anyone at QB. I don't think UM has ever had DL talent like those two schools and don't think it'll happen soon. And those teams win with D (but thats for another post).
Notice I'm not mentioning Newton, RGIII, VY, or Gardner as I think those guys really are usually the best in class type of player that you can't expect to get every 2 years or so. Forcier, Manziel, Wilson, Taji Boyd, Troy Smith types can be had though IMO.
Totally agree with this. Defining what a dual threat means and the system they're running is important to this conversation.
Disagree on the "BCS era" point. Florida State (1999), Oklahoma (2000), Miami (2001), Ohio State (2002), USC (2004), Florida (2006) were all teams without truly mobile starting QB's (or at least no more mobile than a Shane Morris or Andrew Luck type of player). In fact I'd say the only teams with QB's more mobile than a guy like Shane Morris have been Tennesse (1998), Texas (2005), Florida (2008), and Auburn (2010).
I'll give you OU and FSU.
But I put 2001 Miami in with the Bama disclaimer. ie immense talent that UM cannot expect to approach. 2001 and 2002 Miami was when in the middle of their hey day when they set the 1yr, 2yr, 3yr, and 4yr period record for 1st rd picks. That is not happening in a midwest school
OSU 2002 is a huge astericks. BS IMO.
I already gave USC the Bama disclaimer as well (immense talent) we can't expect to duplicate($).
So really you have FSU, OU, and I guess OSU if you want but we all no they were very lucky that season.
again, a major point to my argument is that UM can't recruit like Bama, LSU, and USC/Miami aat there peak. The former two bc of their local. The latter bc of $ and local. if you disagree with this premise then we will obs disagree on the greater idea on NC and Qbs.
he can run. Look up his combine numbers, it's very comparable to Cam Newton's combine numbers. Not sure why people think he's a stiff other than his skin color.
Jim Harbaugh is a good example of a Michigan quaterback that was a passer first but could definitely hurt you with his legs. I think he is a perfect example of what we should always be looking for in a quaterback under the current system.
We don't necessarily need guys that are labeled as "dual-threat". We need guys that kniw how to scramble. Gardner has developed into a very good pocket passer, and scrambles when the line breaks down.
Shane Morris is mobike and can scramble. Same with WS.
This pretty much sums up what I was about to say. Just get guys that can take off when everything breaks down. Gardner is a very unique talent and I don't think we'll see anyone near his all-around tools with this staff. And I'm ok with that as long as we don't have absolute statues at qb.
I highly doubt we'll be getting any more Navarre or Henne type QBs. That was a Lloyd Carr prototype. Seems that most of the QBs Borges worked with had at least enough legs to get away from pressure like Jason Campbell.
Henne was actually a fairly underrated runner for someone considered a drop back passer. They'll still recruit that type if they are confident they can move in the pocket and press the edges on roll outs, like Henne can and like they are confident Speight can. I think Borges would prefer a little more mobility like a guy like Campbell had, but it comes down to other things first.
I've said it a few times now and I'll gladly say it again. Kevin Dillman 2015. He's perfect for us and he "loves" us too.
Russel Bellomy, although we haven't been able to see him play much, is supposed to have decent athleticism and mobility. Morris is reported to have decent athleticism and mobility. The coaches recruited both of these guys because they like their entire package, including their athleticism.
Obviously, neither of these guys are dilithium/dual threat/scrambler types, but they're also not Henne/Navarre statues (yes, I remember the Navarre QB screen).
I've started an online dynasty if interested
My personal opinion...why wouldn't you ya know?
Give the defense something extra to worry about.
I feel like I have heard a million defensive coordinators say they hate dual threats and how they add other elements.
Think the problem is there is a small % of dual threats that seem to have outstanding arms. Extra footwork issues and accuracy issues.
I think that we could argue that Devin, and his mobility, were covering up for many of the deficiencies in the offense; especially blocking. That if Michigan had depth and experience across the front, with the TE's, and downfield with WR's that were powerful blockers, Devin wouldn't have needed to run. The OL would have been able to reset the OL, and impose their will on the defense.
I think that after the Hoke & Co line recruiting comes of age and we see the roadgraters that we've been so geeked for get PT, the offense will not need to have a duel threat QB to be effective.
What's important about offense is to have the ability to exploit a defense when they over commit to one aspect of the offense. The ILB's overcommitting to the run, was exploited by Devin's ability to escape the pocket and attack the edges. But Borges also did it with the waggle. So there are other options other than QB runs, veers, or the like. Its the ability to counter a defense cheating that is important.....
Just my thoughts
I prefer the dual threat QB who is a moderate thrower vs the statue who throws well. Main reason? The statue puts too much burden on the offensive line. Borges should only be willing to put a statue like Speight back there if he is confident he is going to have a bulldozing, effective offensive line. The problem? This is college, and unlike the pro's, the offensive line gets reshuffled with inexperienced players just about every year. Next year we lose Lewan and Schofield... So this year it's the interior, next year it will be the exterior, and so on, and so on...
If Chad Henne had been our QB Saturday, we lose to ND because he would have eaten several sacks Devin escaped, turning 7-12 yard gains into 10 yard losses, for a net -20 or so yards per play, klling multiple drives.
Troy Smith man... Troy effing Smith.
That guy absolutely KILLED us evading sack after sack and then getting a 15 yard completion or running for 15 yards getting the 1st down. I lost a lot of hair during those 3 years.
I can only assume people who call Speight a "statue" have never watched his highlight tape and are merely stereotyping based on his height and skin color. Utterly indefensible statement to make about a kid who rips off at least one 50-yard run and frequently shows great ability to escape the rush in the pocket and throw on the run.
statue in terms of mobility. They can't fucking run but are nearly impossible to sack them because of their timing, pocket movement and ability to make good decisions.
I definitely hope we do. I've thought about this a lot. We don't have to have Denard but somebody even less to what Devin can do just opens up so much. Devin is a very exceptional scrambler and I think we've still only seen the tip of the ice berg. It's going to be a fun season. Go Blue!
If the coaches could have RGIII with the way he turned out, they probably take him over any QB. If it was between a Cam Newton and an Andrew Luck out of HS, they at least take a very close look at Newton, who meets the requirements as a passer but adds his legs. But if they have to choose out of HS between HS Gardner at QB and HS Henne at QB, they are taking Henne every time. That's because they believe Henne meets all the requirements of the position, has similar upside, and is more of a sure thing in their offense.
See above why that is a big mistake. Hypothetical Henne loses last week's ND game for us because unlike Gardner, he would have eaten multiple, net negative 20 yard sacks, killing multiple drives. Statues like Henne put too much pressure on a competent offensive line, which is extremely rare in college. This year for us its the interior, next year the exterior with Lewan and Schofield gone, and so on and so on...
Dual threat QBs offer teams a safety valve to manage the chaos that inevitably comes in college when assignments break down, when Funchess misses 10 blocks, when Kalis gets destroyed repeatedly.
Had Ohio State started a statue instead of Troy Smith against our Woodley/Branch defenses, Michigan wins those games handily and reaches the NC game.
In college, where play execution is magnitudes more subject to breakdown than in the pros: Dual Threat QB with passable throwing judgment >>>> Statue who can throw.
You're talking about where they ended up, not about recruiting them out of high school. I've discussed this above, and it's not a shot at Gardner or where he is now, but he was much more raw and would be a huge system in the system Michigan is running now because of that. Henne would provide similar upside (and they would have called a much different game with healthy 4th yearh Henne than they just did with DG to maximize his upside) and there would have been substantially less risk.
The point is, yes, if they can get what RGIII ended up becoming, they would take that everytime in the college game for the reasons you listed. But the risk in taking RGIII and having him become efficient in the system you want to run compared to taking an Andrew Luck is significant. The case is similar (albeit we probably aren't talking potential #1 overall draft picks here) with Henne and Gardner. They would be just as comfortable with Henne's upside with much less risk involved compared to Gardner. But if they knew Gardner was going to be what he is today, I'm certain they would put much more emphasis on recruiting Gardner than they would otherwise. As is, out of high school, with what we saw from the two, they recruit Henne every time, and it's reasonable and understandable to see why.
FWIW, in a perfect world I would take a mobile QB over someone with decent mobility like Henne if I was comfortable that they would become an RGIII or potentially a Gardner like player. I prefer QB mobility over not, because like you said, they can create more things when plays break down. But this isn't a perfect world and it doesn't necessarily work that way.
The place we differ is on the updside front. To me, statues have the limited upside in college when they face the SEC defenses (or ND's this year) that disrupt the O line, and get pressure, and get sacks.
If anything, the dual threat QBs are the ones with the clearly higher upside. John Manziel is exhibit A. You put any statue into last year's TAM/Bama game, and Bama wins.
Seriously look at us even. With Denard you were talking about exceptional mobility, but I'd put Denard near the lower quartile of dual threat QBs when it came to passing judgment and accuracy. And he still led us to 11-2 and a BCS (lucky) win.
Look at Braxton Miller. He has zero chance of every being a QB in the pros with how wretched his accuracy is, and yet he still manages to drop 50 on Wisconsin last year and now guides the favored team in the BiG.
I'll rephrase- in college, upside: Dual Threat QB >>> Statue
But is that potential relatively marginal additional upside worth taking the substantial risk over another guy (I personally think Gardner's upside is only marginally higher than Shane Morris's upside, for instance). According to the staff, it appears it is not for their system. Denard also got killed against teams like MSU, where a pure passer would have given Michigan a much better chance to win that game. It's different upside that provides different things for a team. Morris will be able to fit throws into windows that Gardner never will. Gardner can make many more plays with his legs. Different upsides, Gardner's is marginally higher, but again, in Michigan's system was a much higher risk of not working out.
The point is you need a true dual threat that can pass and run and is worth taking the risk, which is extremely rare and difficult to find. That's the point I'm trying to make. Obviously, all else equal, a mobile, dual threat is better than a statue (and I don't think the staff every wants purely a statue). But from a risk/reward standpoint in Michigan's system, a Shane Morris is a better recruit than a Devin Gardner coming out of High School. I'm not claiming that's right or wrong or somewhere in between (I think a lot of it depends on many other circumstances, such as depth at the position), but I'm saying it appears to be the staff's point of view. And it appears to be a similar point of view that the Alabama staff is starting to take.
As an aside about my posting, I think this is something I need to be more clear about. There have been numerous times on this board recently where what I say is being taken as what I believe is optimal. Examples include defend Borges (where I'm not saying he's a perfect or even great OC, I'm experessing his POV and what someone in his position would see), Fitz missing running lanes (again, in a perfect world Fitz would hit the open lane, but Fitz is reading his blocks or presuming pressure from a certain area, again it's going off what he sees not what I believe is best), and then this (I'm expressing where I think the staffs preference lies as far as risk/reward and style of player for their system, not what I would prefer in my style system). Just throwing that out there, and seeing as it's happening often on a board with many well-read readers, it's most likely something on my end that I need to be clearer about.
When mobile Denard played Alabama too, as well as dismantling a mobile QB in the National Championship game?
A&M didn't beat Bama because their QB was mobile; they beat them because their QB was really good.
Michigan doesn't need to recruit mobile quarterbacks; they need to recruit really good quarterbacks, whether they're mobile or not.
Agree with Magnus above. Start with the arm and feet. If that's there, the legs are a bonus.
assuming that elite passing and elite running are basically independent, then the probability of having both is the same as the probability of one times the probability of the other. That is, if there's a 1 in 100 chance of having an elite arm and a 1 in 100 chance of having elite legs, then the odds of having both are (1/100)*(1/100)= 1/10,000.People who turn out to be like Devin are very, very rare.
A Venn diagram is always helpful.
"Elite Passer" and "Elite Runner" are not independent events, so multiplying the probabilities is invalid.
1) While we talk about "arm strength", throwing a football is a full-body activity. You have to be "athletic" to be a good thrower, so you'll probably also have above average leg strength.
2) The mental aspect is key - both the best passers and the best throwers will need excellent vision and quick decision making.
3) You also need to be a great student of the game to be an "elite" player at any position. Good football smarts can translate to multiple positions.
Anyway, what you really want to know is, "What is the probability that a QB is an elite runner, given that he is an elite passer?"
recruit dual threat QBs but I do not think we will.
First, thank you OP for posting this topic. If I had one topic to post for my entire MGoBlog "career", this would be it... (but I don't have the points yet).
We should absolutely be recruiting dual threat QBs. And let's get this terminology business out of the way up front. When I say dual threat I mean someone who can make the throws but also use his legs to run and thus force defenses to account for both forms of QB attack. If dual threat isn't the right name for this, then call it whatever you want.
I've read all the posts in this thread already, and I think some folks are missing the big picture when it comes to the dual threat point. First, yes, there are teams winning without dual threat QBs right now - Alabama of course. But the dual threat "trend" is only just begining. Watch in 10 or 20 years and I would put my fanhood on the line that the teams who accept this new trend will wind up winning far more often than the teams that dont. Just give it time for the statistics to settle out. (Ohio State jumped on the bandwagon relatively early and, as a result, is in a fantastic position going forward regarding this element.) In 20 years from how, I see it being a requirement to be a dual threat QB for the big time schools to even consider you. Those that don't adapt will be left behind. And don't misunderstand, it will still be possible to win national championships without them, but you're far more likely to win with a dual threat QB.
And it just irks me when folks say "Michigan won't need a dual threat QB once our great WR, OL, and RB recruiting takes hold". Well, sure we'll win... but wouldn't you want to win more??? Why win a national championship once every decade, say, when you could potentially win 2 or 3 a decade? And yes, I see a dual threat QB making that kind of difference! Even Alabama today I would argue would be even better with a dual threat QB instead of McCarron.
I've been wanting dual threat QBs at Michigan ever since I realized it is the wave of the future (which became apparent during the early 2000s when QBs were gashing Michigan defenses at will for what seemed like years). I'm so high and optimistic about the future of Michigan with the staff we have and the players we're recruiting. BUT... the only thing that makes me a little down is that folks like Morris and Speight, while great players, are lacking this dimension. I realize that true dual threats may be rare, but Michigan needs to expend maximum effort to get these players. It should be position priority number 1 going forward. If Michigan sees the light and recruits non-dual threat QBs only when dual threats are not available, they'll make a program leap from "great" to "dominate".
Devin Gardner was the #1 dual threat QB coming out of HS. He's a rare kind of player that Michigan won't get their hands on often. Not because they're Michigan.. but because players with Gardner's skill set are few and far between.
at (John Charles) Portland State, Boise State (Tony Hilde), UCLA (Cade McNown), Oregon (Tony Graziani), Indiana (Gibran Hamdan), and Auburn (Jason Campbell).
Historically speaking, his preference is to have a QB with some decent wheels on him, but in no way a Denard Robinson/Pat White kind of QB.
I do think that Devin Gardner may be one of the finest passers that Borges has coached in a long while.
How about we enjoy the next two years with DG? Yep, two years , I said it. Then we will have two solid years with Morris. After that, I'm sure there will be another outstanding QB recruit and hopefully they will be a 4.7 40 or better type guy.
Let's have this boil down to one simple question. Do we win Saturday with A.J. McCaron taking snaps or did we need Devin Gardner's legs (for both rushing and gaining time to make throws)?
If we had A.J. McCarron he'd be playing behind Johnny Manziel. Hoke said he'd be our backup, remember?
One game sample sizes while additionally using an extremely limited recruit sample size in the grand scheme of recruiting and how games and seasons for teams play out isn't really the best example. Just sayin'
One game sample sizes are too small I understand and the recruits/players listed above I don't really even care about. Throw Chad Henne is as the A.J McCarron equal and Terrelle Pryor instead of Devin Gardner. I'm just asking in games like Saturday night's, did we NEED the athleticism of Braxton or Terrelle or Vince Young to win that game when Notre Dame was more or less beating our O-line, as a whole, play after play. Devin ultimately made throws like a boss but his legs bought him some plays that I'm wondering if we didn't get would we have won.
Devin thus far has looked like a pocket passer at times, very accurate with great poise so he is almost a best of both worlds, very rare obviously. So the Vince Young/Terrelle Pryor examples come in as they haven't exactly shown themselves to be very good "passers". So, as asked in above posts, is sacrificing some accuracy and even some arm strength (and other pocket passer attributes) for some athleticism and escapability in the college game a better route to go, over recruiting the Chad Henne and Aaron Murray types (even admitting Murray can move well, just not Devin/Terrelle/Vince/Braxton-well) who can sling it but won't make certain plays utilizing their legs that can be game changers.
one of the reasons we "needed" DG's legs last week was due to defficiencies in the rest of the O, i.e. O-line, TE blocking, lack of enough high-end weapons at receiver. Once these are addressed through experience and recruiting (pretty much addressed already by recruiting - just need to keep it up.) the dual-threat nature of the QB will be more of a very-nice bonus than a necessity.
While Henne probably wouldn't have won that game with that game plan, and would have been less likely to than Gardner even with optimal game plans with both, the point that I'm making is that for the team, for the season, for where Michigan wants to go, taking a Henne or McCarron-type recruit out of high school is of more interest than taking a Gardner-esque recruit out of high school, regardless of what the outcome of the ND ended up being.
and the ND game is not the real judge - the ultimate goal for UM is championships. What type of player helps you offset "LB type speed" in SEC DE's? And LB's who run like safeties. That is the bigger picture.
you're assuming the go into the game with the same offensive game plan if McCaron is the QB instead of Gardner.
"Dual-threat" guys tend to come out of high school less polished, since they don't need their arm to win games. Plus a lot of high schools don't throw that much anyway. Gardner had the physical tools and was a great instinctive runner, but was raw as a passer.
I'd actually like to see the coaches mix it up year to year - one year, take a more polished thrower - a "sure thing" pro styler - regardless of his legs. The next, shop around for a more athletic project. Maybe that means a guy with a cannon who just needs to work on his decision making and mechanics, or maybe it means a Gardner who's a killer runner but maybe boom or bust as a passer.
That way you don't miss out on a Gardner or kaepernick, but you always have a competent game manager on hand in case that doesn't work out.
with the exception that maybe they still shoot for the "Rosen-types" every year but can afford to be more flexible if they miss, knowing that they already have a Morris or Speight in the fold. If the "next option" Dual-threat target is that talented an athelete there is also always the option to move them elsewhere to get them on the field (like Devin at WR without the monstous gaping hole at backup QB), have them as an emergency plan in case of massive injuries at QB, and even develop a wildcat package exclusively for them.Oh..and Woohoo!!!! 1000 pts finally :)
"I'd actually like to see the coaches mix it up year to year - one year, take a more polished thrower - a "sure thing" pro styler - regardless of his legs. The next, shop around for a more athletic project. Maybe that means a guy with a cannon who just needs to work on his decision making and mechanics, or maybe it means a Gardner who's a killer runner but maybe boom or bust as a passer" Look like a lot of us are on the same page...
The downside of recruiting a dual-threat QB is much less than a Pro-style QB who cannot play other positions. A prospect like Gardner was, who has a strong arm, quick feet but poor mechanics coming out of high school, can be coached to be a good passer, and if that effort failed, they can be put into other positions such as WR, LB, safeties. Someone like David Cone, will be your a bench warmer for 5 years.
You can't coach raw speed. You can coach better throwing mechanics.
Take a QB that can beat you with his feet and is at least decent with his arm... then coach the arm.
Otherwise Denard would have been great. Yes, the downside of recruiting a dual-threat as a football player is lower, but the downside of recruiting a dual-threat as a QB tends to be higher (note: tends). If you're looking for a QB or need a QB, you factor that matters is downside at that position, not downside as a football player.
On a scale of 1-10*, if your options out of high school are
QB A, who is a 6 as a passer and 7 as a runner, or...
QB B, who is a 10 as a passer and 1 as a runner...
I'll take QB A all day. That added dimension of attack more than makes up for the discrepency as a passer (which you can teach at least a point, maybe two). I know using simple arithmetic on this topic is a bit of an oversimplification, but on the surface it does show something significant. By not having running ability you're conceeding a gaping hole in your offensive arsenal.
* On this scale I'm using I'd say Denard is a 2 passer, 10 runner and Gardner (so far) is a 8 passer, 8 runner.
But let's add them up to be the same thing. If the option was:
A. 6 passer and 8 runner
B. 8 passer and a 6 runner
I'd take B every time if I was Michigan.
If you don't want to just add them up, because obviously there is more emphasis on the legs, lets look at two other options from Michigan's perspective
A. 6 passer and 8 runner
B. 8.5 passer and 3.5 runner
I probably still take option B if I'm Michigan. I think it's fair to say Gardner was realistically QB A as a HS recruit. Morris is probably close to B in the second example. As a Michigan coach with their style of play and what they want to do with the QB, I probably take QB B. Gardner has proven better as a passer than what he looked like coming out of HS, but that's a risk/reward thing again. What Gardner won't ever be is a: 10 passer, 8+ runner
But Morris can be a 10 passer, 4 runner (as far as manipulating the pocket), and at worse will still have some mobility and a well above average arm.
First, I appreciate this discussion with you. Good stuff.
With your first example (6 passer, 8 runner vs. 8 passer, 6 runner), those are so close to one another I would probably not insist on one or the other. (And the fact they add to the same value supports the indifference.)
With your second example, I disagree and would take QB A without hesitation. And when I say "I" would take QB A, I mean that if I were the coach I would take QB A, but also I feel Michigan should take QB A! I agree with you that Gardner was clearly more QB A as a HS recruit and Morris is close to QB B, But it's the statement "As a Michigan coach with their style of play and what they want to do with the QB..." that I have issue with. One of my points is that Michigan's style of play should be such that it is QB A that fits their system. So, put another way, I'm saying the square peg is the right peg, so make your hole square, not round. Michigan should be adopting a style of play that utilizes QB A. In doing so, they open that otherwise untapped dimension of attack. Failing to do so leaves that dimension on the table.
I guess I just see the running aspect as more valuable than you do, which, fair enough. While I love Denard (don't we all), I wouldn't want to sacrifice that much arm. But I really would rather another Gardner (or even a half step below Gardner, passing wise) to a Morris or Speight.
I guess my point is, if QB A turns out to be Gardner now, then yeah, I wouldn't hesitate much in taking him, because he can still fit what the coaches want to do with the position with the added benefit of passing. But what he realistically could have been I don't think does. It's not that they can't change their philosophy to try to fit the QB, it's about what QB can they utilize that gives them the best chance to win with what they want to do. I just think that's more the second QB. I think it fits better. Other teams would be different with what they want to do. I think we'll agree to disagree here as far as what Michigan should want for their system or a system they would run with the other QB.
But if you take a QB every year, that's not an issue. The point is, if Shane Morris can't learn the position, he's a bench warmer. If Devin Gardner had failed to learn the position, he's got the physical tools to be a good to great wideout, and would still contribute.
Basically, if you're taking a guy that absolutely, positively has to become your starting QB, yeah, you ought to take the more polished thrower, even at the cost of some potential upside.
But if you've already got a couple decent QBs on your roster and are recruiting for potential, a boom-or-bust dual threat is better than a boom-or-bust pocket statue.
Basically, 2015 is a great time for Michigan to look for a dual threat type, since we've already got Shane and Speight in the fold.
Though, even polished passers aren't sure things, so you have to be careful there a bit.
I think Michigan wanted Rosen because they thought he was the best at the position and provided the highest upside of them all. I think the next group will include Dillman and White, both of whom I really like. It may come down to how Bellomy has progressed back from injury, and will likely also come down to time table and other things.
I personally like Dillman at this point. I don't know about the coaches, but I think they would be fine with either one. I think actually think '16 will likely be a better time to take more of a risk on a QB, as they'll have Morris, Speight, and '15 guy assuming it's someone like White, but it'll still come down to who they think is the best, with maybe a little more willingness to take a risk.
I guess when I say "polished" I mean "closer than average to college ready". In other words, makes good reads, has good technique, plays in a system that requires him to be a good passer. Yeah, that doesn't make him a "sure thing", but his floor is probably higher.
Assuming Devin stays for 2014 and Speight redshirts, Speight either passes Morris or sits till at least 2017, at which point either Speight or Hypothetical 2015 Guy (H15G) ends up starting with at least 2 years of eligibility left, plus H16G and/or H17G backing them up. So my guess is either Speight or H15G will spend most of their career as a backup.
With that in mind, you want H15G to be a guy with a ceiling higher than Speight, even if his floor is lower. Speight strikes me as at least decent, so I think 2015 is an opportunity to swing for the fences.
Of course, we're talking game theory and hypotheticals here, when the coaches have to look at real actual human beings. *shrug*
"But if you've already got a couple decent QBs on your roster and are recruiting for potential, a boom-or-bust dual threat is better than a boom-or-bust pocket statue."
They're both pretty much the same IMO.
Difference in my opinion is that "dual threats" are much more likely to "boom or bust" candidates than pocket passers.
Generally the good high school passer has lower upside than the "dual threat" guy - but he also has a lower downside.
There are plenty of boom-or-bust pro-style quarterback prospects: guys with howitzer arms but poor technique, touch, and/or decision making. Or maybe they just don't throw much in high school. These guys could turn out elite with a little coaching, or wash out.
But I think you're more likely to hear about a boom-or-bust dual threat guy because they are more likely to be recruited at the FBS level. Plausible dual threat guys are more rare anyway, the spread is in vogue, and even the shaky passers often get interest from big schools at non QB positions.
A boom-or-bust pro-style guy is more likely to end up at a mid-major or FCS. So you'll probably never hear about them unless they blow up and get drafted.
Jay Riemersma and Andy Mignery would disagree.
As long as said Quarterback can make all the throws like Devin, or a RGIII, or Teddy Bridgewater, or Tajh Boyd, while still having the ability to beat defenses with his feet then I'm all for it. That type of quarterback is the most potent weapon to have in today's game. But if I want to win I'll take the future Peyton Manning over a future Tebow any day.
I'd take Tebow more than not over Peyton personally.
Now, if I were the Michigan coaches, I'd take Peyton over Tebow.
But personally I would not. Especially when you have defenses like Alabama and LSU these days that could easily shutdown a one dimensional player like Tebow. Tebow would have success, but as long as an Alabama or Ohio is waiting at the end of the year to play for the NC, then I am afraid you would have to settle for second best at best.
Man, I am really going to miss having these types of QBs. There were a TON of plays that Gardner created something out of nothing which were game changing moments. With our future QB stable, those would have been sure fire sacks. Even with an improved offensive line and skill players, why would you not want to combine the dual threat QB like Gardner for a maybe little better passer that can't create on his own.
People's idea of what is dual threat are way different.
Player A) Makes all the throws, can move in the pocket, roll out and deliver strikes. This is NOT a dual threat. That's just a QB that is mobile. Pro-style all the way. (Every past UM great).
Player B) Can make all the throws (less consistent then Player A), can pull on a zone read and get 15+yds, after 2nd progression he scrambles and is a weapon not a fumble/injury waiting to happen. This is a dual threat. (Troy Smith, Manziel, Forcier).
Player C) Not a good passer. Much better runner. This is a running QB. (Denard, Pat White)
The people here that want dual threats want Player B. We know that Player C won't win NCs. Player A can be great (a #1 overall pick) but IMO he has to have AA OL in the game and probably AA type WR talent to beat an elite SEC DL. The odds of having AA pro style QB, OL, and WR at the same time are slim.
A Great player B can beat that same elite SEC DL with All Big Ten WR, OL, and WR talent IMO. much more likely, and repeatable.
Good post. It should also be noted that there's a chance Player B evolves into Player ALPHA AND OMEGA, the guy who passes as well as any Player A but is also a gamebreaking threat with his legs (RG3 would be the best example of this).
Obviously QB mobility and ability to run is not the most important factor for Hoke and Borges, but it probably isn't second most important either. I think in addition to a good arm and accuracy, they're looking for a guy who has great leadership skills, isn't afraid to work hard, and who possesses the ability to read and process information rapidly. Being a true duel threat seems down the list a ways.
Cade McNown, Jason Campbell, Russell Wilson, and Troy Smith are all examples pointed out in this thread that are viable year in and year out to get. I have pointed out the latter 2 on multiple threads on this topic in the past (the conversation usually breaks out on any thread that discusses a future QB target). RGIII, Vince Young, Pryor (who I believe was the #1 QB recruit) are exceptions to the rule - you will get one of those coming out every 4-5 years, and someone like RGIII was not a 5 star recruit. These kids are out there and Borges has coached the first 2 name in this post, and now Devin so he has had a taste. If he chooses to go against that model than that is the Hoke philosophy and we'll have to accept it. I prefer / hope not. And better yet only about 3-4 of the "top 12ish" programs really are going for that sort of QB - OSU among them. I would not mind a mix and match of the "more pure passer" in 1 class, offset by a more pass first, but can run type (like the first 4 I listed) in the next class. Also Speight for all the hate has surpisingly good rushing stats for a 6'6 dude! Not saying he is going to be a Troy Smith but if he can have the mobility of an Andrew Luck in that body frame it would be a major bonus.
I think all most of us are asking is to find a guy who can do to other teams what Troy smith did to us - tear our hearts out repeatedly when we had him in our grasp in the backfield. Extend plays - you don't need to have a 4.4 40 or scramble for 45 yards. Just kill the defense's will with those plays we all remember. (Yes I realize he was a great college QB but again this is Michigan fergodsakes - we should be in on just about any high end QB in the nation we want, if we don't get choice #1, choice #3 should still be a fantastic QB) We can recruit all the high end OLs we want but there will always be holes in the OL as in any random year a rs sophomore is playing and the OL constantly turns over - having a QB to neutralize said hole would be precious.
If you let the coaches continue with their recruiting program in a couple of year there will not be "holes" in the Oline. Because in any random year it will always be 4th and 5th year players there.
Further we may well "be in on" the top 1-4 Qbs in the class, but we are not likely to get one every year, nor is it a given that any of the four are what the coaches are looking for.
Think for just a moment about Stribling. When the coaches took him after a camp appearance this blog went sideways. "Why now when there are so many better prospects?' "I could see this offer in February but now?!!!" etc. Turns out that, for a true freshman, he's had a damn impressive first two games.
At this point in the program, the coaches are still scheming to use talent to fill gaps in skills across both the offense and defense. Give them two maybe three more years and they will be recruiting to match what the program will need two years down the road.
My point is that once the coaches get the program full of the guys they want, they won't need to hedge their bets on failures in various positions. I'm sure that they'll be recruiting the best passing QBs they can and look for mobility, but not someone who Borges would be designing runs for. That's not where this program is headed.
I always remember, when we had our RR years, obviously RR was recruiting hard at Terelle Pryor and Braxton Miller, as they are good fit for RR's system. However, both of them rejected us and went to Ohio, stating that they would like to be pro-style QB, or train as a pro-style QB in Tressel's system. So actually I smiled at Miller when Meyer was hired as their coach, while we got Hoke. Anyway, my point is, now it becomes the opposite, that Ohio is running spread and we are running pro. Will recruits like Pryor and Miller, or should say, Gardner, will consider us because of our pro-style and rejecting Meyer, looking at what Tebow is doing in the NFL?