Recruiting to fit academics?
.Maybe we have stumbled on a whole new Michigan thang.
Conventional wisdom is that the offensive line are the smartest players on the field, needing to be smart to handle blocking schemes, play audibles, etc without moving or talking.
Now that paving the other team with a deep rotation of O line bangers seems like a Harbaugh at Michigan approach, perhaps we can go Wisconsin style and become a haven for future NFL O line guys.
It is a recruiting approach that fits the academic requirements of Michigan.
So where's the beef?
November 28th, 2021 at 9:11 PM ^
Sounds good to me. I've been a tad envious of that Wisconsin O-line, especially those past years when they paved our defense to make way for their running backs.
November 28th, 2021 at 9:14 PM ^
Big bodies are great but Moore has done an amazing job with that crew. He is critical to the success continuing. Pay that man. Give him an additional title of sorts too. Co-OC to Asst. Head Coach?
November 28th, 2021 at 9:34 PM ^
What about the RB coach?
he was pretty good as well
November 29th, 2021 at 5:23 AM ^
Make Hart Co-OC. Could see him as next OC.
November 28th, 2021 at 9:24 PM ^
Great idea. I don't think any coach has ever thought of recruiting a dominant offensive line, probably until watching this game and seeing how well it worked out for us.
Hear me out, but what if the coaches try recruiting a dominant defensive line also? We'd be unstoppable!
November 28th, 2021 at 10:20 PM ^
A bit unnecessarily heavy on the sarcasm. He's obviously not a fanatic focussed on recruiting and his thoughts are reasonable if not original for the board. Also, his point was not that it's a good idea to recruit good lines. His idea was that it is particularly appropriate for Michigan to recruit OL that consider academics important. You deliberately misstated his idea to make it seem more obvious. The world is full of people who enjoy mocking and insulting others. Let's try to be a little more brotherly to our fellow fans. (Unless they really deserve it.)
November 29th, 2021 at 8:37 AM ^
OP really deserves it for this post.
November 28th, 2021 at 9:40 PM ^
You make some good points. Stanford has been a major competitor to us for some time. Ironically, mostly due to Harbaugh. (He raised that team from nothing to a consistent power focused on a powerful line and the run.) However, they have been fading since he left and they are becoming a bit less troublesome.
November 28th, 2021 at 10:17 PM ^
"However, they have been fading since he left ..."
They've been fading, sure, but here's Shaw's record there since he started:
2011 11–2
2012 12–2
2013 11–3
2014 8–5
2015 12–2
2016 10–3
2017 9–5
2018 9–4
2019 4–8
2020 4–2
2021 3–9
It's ridiculous to say that the fade started right after Harbaugh left.
November 29th, 2021 at 10:41 AM ^
I didn't say "right after he left". Please quote accurately if you are going to criticize a comment. I just observed that they have been fading and becoming less of a recruiting challenge to us. Perhaps saying since he left was redundant but it is true that they were not regarded as a football power historically but they achieved unprecedented success under Harbaugh (defeated USC in record fashion, most ever wins in a season, first bowl win in school history (Orange Bowl), ...) but they now seem to be returning to their historical norm.
November 28th, 2021 at 9:43 PM ^
We haven't deeply rotated the OL when it counted. However the DL we sure are.
November 28th, 2021 at 9:47 PM ^
Let's set our sights considerably higher than Wisconsin, shall we?
November 28th, 2021 at 10:24 PM ^
Anyone that watched Stueber at the press conference certainly saw a young man that fits the description of a smart O lineman. The kid is poised.
November 28th, 2021 at 10:28 PM ^
I assume that I am quite a bit older than most who post here, but Michigan in the 70's and 80's was known for its O line and linemen who often went on to the NFL. We were also known for our running backs (not altogether surprising given the strengths of our OL) before we became known for our string of QB's who went on the play professionally.
As for out backs, the knock on Bo was that he worked them so hard in practices and in the games that it shortened their pro careers which, for running backs, tends to be more limited anyways.
I'm old school admittedly. Over the years, schemes come in and out of fashion and I shake my head when some pundit pontificates that we need to do this or that to join the 21st century. If you have a dominant offensive line and a dominant defensive line, you can run what you want - including 3 yards and a cloud of dust - and create trouble for any offense on defense.
November 28th, 2021 at 10:49 PM ^
Oline seems to be one of the few positions where you can develop elite players with good coaching. You still need some of the measureables of course but good S&C and coaching goes a long way. Stars seems to matter more at some of the skill positions where you can’t teach speed or raw athletic ability. I see no need to make big changes to our Oline process.
November 29th, 2021 at 12:27 AM ^
I’m a believer that O line & D line should always be first priority in recruiting. Merely for the fact that 99.5% of the humans on earth are immediately disqualified from even playing the position due to physical stature. They are the rarest bird on the team. With scarcity comes value. No team that puts 4 out of 5 in the NFL is going to lose much. You do that consistently and you will win championships.
November 29th, 2021 at 8:42 AM ^
Uhh, this is such nonsense. We've always recruited according to academic requirements and we've had amazing offensive linesmen in recent memory.
Jake Long was literally a #1 NFL draft pick . . .
Idk why Im hitting save, i know the mods will delete this thread soon.