The roster and recruiting
So just wanted to get everyones take on the recent roster moves...
We have Stonum.. kinda.
We have lost 2 guys at our thinnest positions.
We have lost one of my favorite recruits from last year.
So, as it stands...
When the 2012 class marches onto campus next year, assuming they redshirt, there will be 5 OL on scholarship in front of them.
4 wide receivers (including slots)
3 interior defensive linemen
4 Exterior defensive linemen
6 or so linebackers, only 2 of which I am hopeful for or positive they can contribute.
How does this change Hokes focus on maybe only getting 1 DT in this class? (assuming Godin rolls into the 3Tech DT)
At this point it seems essential to land a WR, and also at least 2 interior DTs. We can wait for a center for next year, but I would love to get a good center prospect on the board as well.
I think Caleb Stacey ends up at Center. Kalis and maybe Bars seems destined for guard. Magnuson and Braden are tackles. And if we add Diamond, he is another guy who could end up at guard.
wants to play tackle at the next level. And I really like Caleb Stacey at guard..so do some of the recruiting site(#12 ranked guard on rivals). If you are gonna take 26 (6 more recruits) this is my prediction
2DT
2WR
1OL (If we don't have a big time recruit, we wont take one IMO)
DE Chris Wormley
NO QB unless it gunner
People really to to quit overlooking Jack Miller. The kid can play and is an intelligent football player.
I don't think people are overlooking Miller, we just need depth in addition to him. Right now in 2013, he is the only centre on our roster. Someone on the roster or in the 2012 class will have to work at being a centre, and we'll need to recruit one in 2013 in all likelihood.
It has always been essential to land a WR or two is this class. If we don't get a WR in this class we could be in very bad shape in couple years.
Fortunately, it looks like the coaching staff has a number of targets (Darboh, Payton, Burbridge, etc.) to meet this need.
with eligibility by year
http://touchthebanner.blogspot.com/2011/01/eligibility-count-for-2011.html
With Morris in hand, next year we should be able to nail down some top notch receivers...2 or 3? Don't count out Thompson either. He may sneak back in there, especially since he and Shane tore it up together at the Gridiron Kings.
He would be a great pass catching TE, but I'm not sure if he is the type of recruit the staff is looking for at WR.
I think the staff wants someone who is able to stretch the field vertically and speed is not something that Ron Thompson has lots of.
But the NCAA's recent assinine statement about TSIO didn't help us in his case. Still, there's a long time until February so we'll see.
I think Bri'onte is waiting to see how the season goes for whichever schools have made his short list, as well as any attrition that they may suffer along the way.
it'd be sick to have stonum for next year.. thatd be dirty with stokes(if he pans out), stonum, and rountree.
I agree we need a WR, but 4 is not correct unless you are planning on going Saban.
The returning Wr's are
Roundtree, Stokes, Jackson, TRob, Gallon, Dileo, J Robinson
That is 7 not 4. Also I would not worry about WR's. Morris will be able to pull top guys to come with him next year and they'll be ready to go right away.
Yes, I also count 9 Scholarship OL, not 5 who have eligibility in 2012 (based on the depth by class under useful stuff). I'm not following the math here.
Next year we have Roundtree, 3 WR's and 3 SR's. With us having as many as 7 remaining in 2012 and 11 currently some of these kids won't ever get a chance and I'd expect a transfer or 2 from that overloaded group. Roundtree is a sure starter, Jerald Robinson could earn regular reps at WR, Stokes and Jackson aren't really fast enough to start at, but are good short yardage and redzone-jump-ball roleplayers. Dileo, Gallon, and Terrence Robinson are all the slot receivers we'll ever need as well. If we take 2 WR's then we won't have any room for top kids next year in Morris's class.
He added a caveat to the OP "assuming they redshirt" so that means their RS FR year, aka 2013.
So then we lose Stokes, Roundtree, and Robinson for a total of 4.
I hope we go with:
2 DT (Pipkins, O'Brien)
2 WR (Burbridge, Stanford)
1 DE (Wormley)
1 OL (Diamond)
I'd be more than happy with that, and I'm wiling to trade a WR for an OL or DE if Washington or Garnett/Banner want in
but I think he meant by when they march onto campus (2012) assuming they redshirt (they won't be able to play so what we'll have on the field in 2012.) I'm still more worried about OL and DL too. Losing Talbott and waiting on DEs to grow into the position means that if our 2012 DT redshirts we'll have Campbell, Washington, and Ash as our entire DT rotation. Black and Wilkins are too small for DT, but Chris Rock might get the move inside by 2012. If he doesn't then we need a 2012 DT (or 2) to not redshirt.
so that basically leaves 4 outside WR's. We need 2 more.
True, but slot receiver is the most likely position to have attrition, due to the difference in offensive coaching philosophies. Since we are at 22 open spots now, and the coaches expect 26, it wouldn't surprise me if some of the slot receivers go elsewhere or are not renewed.
I like our numbers, and next year, when we bring in Shane Morris, we should be able to add 3+ WRs, so I'm confused on how this is a huge need. We lack depth on the lines.
The need for a WR is routinely overstated and they're fine taking just one in '12. But I don't think they'll bring in more than 3 in '13. WR recruiting numbers should return to being about equal to CB numbers (i.e. about 2/year with maybe a swing guy versatile enough to be available for another position.)
Even if they took zero in '11 and one in '12, the roster numbers still don't call for 4 WR.
Well, if we take one this year, the 2013 season leaves us with: J. Robinson (rumored work ethic issues), Jeremy Jackson (not a very highly ranked WR and probably a possession guy), T Robinson (could not get a fifth year), Gallon (his position does not translate well to prostyle), Dileo (not highly ranked and position does not translate well to prostyle), and the freshman WR recruit this year. A junior/senior Devin Garndner could potentially have a very weak and shallow WR corps to throw to. Given our previous couple of years issues with recruiting busts, injuries, lack of necessary depth or developed talent, or just down right bad luck, I think it is prudent to take two WR this year and if we only take this year, then to take at least 3 WR in the following class. Imagine recruiting 1 WR in 2012 class and 2 WR in the 2013 class and all three bust or are sub-average WR. The position could be pretty terrible. It isn't that easy to evaluate talent that one can skimp on recruiting certain positions and then say let's make sure we get those really talented guys who can have an immediate impact. Remember the 2009 CB recruiting class was Turner and Witty. That didn't work out so well for us. You don't just recruit two WR or two CB every year and call it a day.You recruit to fill need and if you have a holes at a position, then you recruit more guys to give you a better shot at filling those holes (giggle).
In the unlikely event that the group of J.Robinson, Jackson, Dileo, and the 2012 recruit don't produce 2 quality players, then Michigan will be able to sell recruits on immediate playing time, and likely land some high caliber recruits. Unlike OL, WR is a position where freshman routinely contribute immediately.
If you project your top 4 returning players to fail at any position group things look pretty nasty anywhere. With that approach, every position is a huge need.
As for your negative outlook on individual WRs:
-Jackson contributed as a freshman and had an impressive offer sheet as a recruit. He was one of the higher rated recruits in his class (Rivals was not as high on him as other sites). Being a possession receiver isn't necessarily a bad thing. He's supposed to be a big target with good hands.
-Dileo has positive practice reports and smaller WR are used regularly in the pros and in pro-style. DeSean Jackson, Steve Smith, Wes Welker, etc. No reason that if paired with a bigger receiver to one side, diminutive WR can't be productive as college players.
-Robinson. Also had some decent practice reports. Red-shirted last year, so lets wait and see.
I get the impression that when some posters look at roster balance, they don't pay enough attention to the class (freshman are rarely able to contribute) or consider attrition/injury. My admittedly layman opinion is that good roster balance has no 1st year players on your two-deep.
When considering this at WR, we are OK in 2012, but it is 2013 that is a concern. If all of the WRs currently on the roster make it to 2013, and we add only 1 WR this year, we would have 5 non-1st year WRs. If you consider three WR positions, that means we have a freshman (2013 class) in the two-deep. And, that doesn't even factor in attrition/injury (this is two-years away after all) or the fact that maybe some of the slot receivers included in the above count may not be the type of slot receiver they use in our new offense.
It may not be dire, but I think it would be highly advisable to take two WR.
but it can be addressed in 2013. 5 non-1st year WR is plenty for a pro-style offense. There aren't 3 WR positions if you have TEs and FBs on scholarship.
I can see us adding 2 or 3 in 2013.
is that WR is not a position where you usually see true freshmen routinely excel (unlike RB or sometimes CB because of the physical ability requirement). The difference is you need to have timing routes and option routes to consider as well as a vastly different playbook. Also, the # of routes you need to know are massively larger, as most stud WR in highschool run posts, outs, flags and go's. DOnt forget, you have the ball coming in at an exceptionally faster rate, and drops are a big problem.
If you look at our #s, we have a very limited depth at the 2 outside receiver postions. Im not sold on anyone we have on the roster once Roundtree leaves, and we will be sorely tested if we have to start true frosh in 2012.
Also, WR rotates more than most positions, so we routinely need 4-6 WRs to play a game. Assuming no injuries, thats what we have.
If we dont take WR this class we will be in trouble in 2013.
We will have 4 WRs on scholarship. 4.
WR contribute as freshman at least as often as CBs.
Projected depth at WR is sufficient for '12. It becomes a bigger issue in '13 after Stokes and Roundtree depart.
WR don't rotate that often. Pre-Rodriguez, our starting WR played most offensive snaps. Carr hardly had 6 WR on the roster, let alone use them in individual games. It was common for no more than 2-3 WR to have receptions in a competitive game.
In 2013, we will have 3 seniors, 1 junior, plus 2012 recruits (1 or 2), plus 2013 recruits (2 or 3). That number (6 to 8 WR) is more than enough.
I wouldn't stress too much about WRs in the coming years. Morris will open the floodgates in that department. What young WR wouldn't want to join a recruiting class led by what may well be the top-rated passing QB in the country?
after Kiel commits there. For one example.
Whuh? Kiel hasn't committed to Indiana. And if he does, so will some nice receivers, though probably not as many as Michigan would lure with their recruit (because M will offer a far better supporting cast).
I don't know that we should be too worried about what the roster looks like in 2013; that's a full two years down the road. Over a four to five year period, you have to replace your entire roster anyway (not counting the rare individuals who get a medical redshirt).
Instead of having knee jerk reactions to roster changes, I would rather see a slightly more disciplined approach. For example, where the coaches are always trying to get 1 QB, 1 RB, 1 WR, 1 TE or another WR, 2-3 OL, 2-3 DL, 2 LB, 2-3 defensive secondary in each class - then fill up the rest of the class with the best talent you can.
I think we are well on our way to a great class and we'll be fine. If we don't pick up 2 WR or another 2 DT in the 2012 class, we still have an opportunity in the 2013 class to pick up some quality guys.
FWIW the university website lists Dileo as 5'10, which isn't even that short. It's entirely possible that he had a growth spurt since high school.
Adding him as a walkon makes me feel much better about our OL situation.