Support MGoBlog: buy stuff at Amazon
Sam Webb said on WTKA this morning that TE Ron Thompson from East Detroit HS said that he would annouce his decision this week. Sam seemed a little unconvinced that the announcement would really go forward but Sam said he had a gut feeling that Thompson would pick U of M if it does.
Sam's podcast:
http://www.wtka.com/index.php?fuseaction=home.podcasts_sel&id=12012
Thompson's Scout profile:
http://michigan.scout.com/a.z?s=162&p=8&c=1&nid=4825348
Yea! Happy news makes me happy.
Rivals mentioned that Ron Wakes up one day and states he wants to commit to Michigan and other mornings wants to wait it out. Either way looks good for Coach Hoke and Co
It's pretty much only a matter of time with Thompson. He's Scout's #137 prospect overall, so if you trust Scout...this is a very good thing.
How did he make it that high with that offer list? Isn't that the main metric used to grade prospects rank?
It's a part of the evaluation process, but not the whole thing. His old high school isn't very heavily recruited/scrutinized, so he was a bit under the radar.
I think that statement is arguable.
Are you really trying to rate whether Scout or Rivals was right on the kids from last years class. They were all freshman last year, and most of them would never have even been forced into game action in most situations. You have no idea at this point whether the rankings on these kids were right or wrong. Let them have a few years in the program before you start making claims that their star ranking was correct or incorrect. Freshman playing significant playing time don't mean that their star rating was right or wrong, it just means that our depth was pretty bad at their position, and they were forced into action they should have probably never seen.
Whatever on Turner. I said nothing about JT. My point was that you are trying to say whether or not the kids who were FRESHMEN last football season had the right star rating or not. How do you know Ricardo Miller, Jerald Robinson, or D.J. Williamson aren't going to be very good wide recievers in the program at some point. Not to mention Ken Wilkins was a physical specimen coming into college, that with the right coaching may become one of the better defensive linemen Michigan has had in a while. JT Turner was a case of a kid who had all the potential in the world, but just didn't have what it took to make it in college. Read what I read before you post a reply as silly as that.
I think it's WAY too early to judge the 2010 class, especially the defensive linemen like Ash and Wilkins. And Gardner has barely seen the field, so I'm not sure why his 5-star ranking on Scout is more accurate than Rivals' 4-star rating.
Furthermore, Cameron Gordon, Toussaint, and Washington all still have a chance to be pretty good players. So I'm not sure why they shouldn't have been 4-star recruits. The jury's still out on the majority of these guys. Will Campbell should have been a redshirt freshman this past season.
Early returns say nothing. You're counting Josh Furman as a success story when he has literally never played a down of college football. There are huge, huge errors in your assessment of the recruiting services.
Looking back at the 2006 and 2007 classes would be more helpful than looking at 2009 and 2010. Otherwise...bleh.
Agreed, this is ridiculous. Furman has earned his 4 star rating but Toussaint, QW (who have both played and looked pretty good) and Cam Gordon (who started every game last year and is projected as a starter this fall) haven't? Furman should be in the same category as Ash and Wilkins - defensive players who redshirted last year and probably won't start this fall but will likely see the field. How can you say one of those three have earned their 4 stars but the other two haven't?
You're right that Cam Gordon was an obvious target at safety...
...which is why he's playing linebacker. If you ask me, BOTH sites deserve a big fat donut for rating Gordon because they both ranked him as a wide receiver. But the dude was 4th on the team with 77 tackles, picked off 3 passes, recovered 2 fumbles, and scored a defensive touchdown. And he did all that in his first season playing defense as a redshirt freshman. So a redshirt freshman position switcher does all that...but you somehow say he's not a 4-star? And then you say Furman IS a 4-star based on some practice reports? WTF?
It's not the same as saying we can't evaluate the 2007 class because Steve Watson still has a year left. You can't be serious. Fifth year seniors are different than redshirt freshmen and true freshmen. I figure you know that, but maybe you need a reminder.
What position switchers are ahead of Ash and Wilkins? You mean Quinton Washington and Will Campbell, both of whom are a year older? And Wilkins is playing 5-tech DT, which as far as I know, is not populated by any position-switchers.
I'm all for making predictions if you think Scout WILL PROVE TO BE more accurate. But as far as the 2009 and 2010 classes go, there's nothing conclusive whatsoever up to this point.
"The difference is that Gordon's proven to be a fairly deficient player and had to move positions"
You honestly have no clue what you're talking about. Gordon hasn't proven to be anything other than "not a a safety." The previous defensive staff, which was absolutely clueless, played Gordon at FS because of poor judgment and/or a lack of bodies. To say that he's been "fairly deficient" is beyond ridiculous. And if you put so much stock in spring practice reports, then you should know that Greg Mattison has spoken glowingly of Gordon.
Your contrast of Furman/Gordon is wrong. Flat-out. Just stop.
Van Bergen isn't a position switcher. He was a high school defensive end who played defensive end in 2007-08, played defensive tackle for one year (2009) out of necessity, then played defensive end in 2010, and he's playing defensive end again in 2011*. There are no position switchers ahead of Ken Wilkins. Period.
*Van Bergen is playing the 5-tech DT spot, which is essentially a strongside defensive end. The only difference between a 5-tech DE and a 5-tech DT is in the name.
Sweet Jesus...do you REALLY think Ryan Van Bergen is a position-switcher and, therefore, it speaks poorly of Ken Wilkins that he's behind a fifth year senior? These are the ramblings of an insane person. You're not insane. Do yourself a favor.
No, I'm not ready to call Gordon a 3-star, Campbell an anything-star, Gallon an anything-star, etc., judge Cullen Christian or Courtney Avery, none of that. That's stupid.
If you need a refresher course on how star ratings are determined (by Rivals, at least), follow this link:
http://www.rivals.com/aboutrankings.asp?Sport=1
At no point in that explanation does it say that a player's potential needs to be reached by, say, April of his true freshman year (which you're implying with your judgments of Christian, Avery, Wilkins, Ash, Furman, etc.).
This argument is a waste of time. I've had my say.
"No one said there was anything conclusive. It just SEEMS (SO FAR) like Scout is doing a better job."-Mat
Scout has been better than Rivals at pegging Michigan recruits in the last couple of years.-Mat
Looks like you are that one calling it conclusive. Your points are just so off. You dig yourself a bigger and bigger hole with each post you made on this topic. Just leave it be and go somewhere and buy yourself another t to go on the end of your name.
No one is arguaing at all about Turner, but the fact that both sites had him rated very high and he was a total flop, neither is more right than the other. They both biffed on him, and that happens.
But for almost every other guy you mention is something completely off-base. Furman is a guy who has players his age playing above him (but gets good practice reports!) and he is warranted a 4-star (even though I haven't exactly heard a waterfall of raving reviews on him and certainly nothing saying he'll start) but Cam Gordon, who is a similar player to Furman in a lot of ways, is a very likely starter (and likely far more lauding practice reviews!!) and he's a solid 3 star. Only because you think he wasn't very good when playing as a freshman in what ended up being the wrong position for him. Do you see why this is crazy? Do you now understand why people negged you?
Richard Ash is right where you would expect a RS frosh 4 star DT to be: behind upperclassmen who are a 4- and 5-star. Kenny Wilkins is where you would expect a RS frosh 4 star DT/DE to be: behind a 4 star 5th year senior returning starter. Josh Furman, however, is likely going to lose a battle with guys either in his own recruiting class, a 3 star in the class above him (T. Gordon) or a walk-on.
The guys you left out of your discussion from that class that Rivals ranked better than Scout is Carvin Johnson and Cullen Christian. Rivals had Johnson as the #33 S, whereas Scout had him at #79. For a guy who started the first game of the season and looked good as a true frosh, I'd say Rivals wins that battle. Although both services overrated Cullen Christian (at least so far), Scout though he was a slam dunk naming him the #3 CB in the country, while Rivals was a little less confident saying he was #8 nationally. Not a huge difference, but I think we'd all agree Rivals was closer.
You and I have different sources, because the way it sounds to me...Carvin Johnson is your likely starter at FS.
Ash and Wilkins literally have not finished their freshman years of college. Heininger, while a former walk-on, is a 22-year-old fifth year senior. Furthermore, they play positions (defensive line) that typically require multiple years of seasoning, strength gains, technique improvements, etc. Rob Renes didn't start until he was a redshirt sophomore. William Carr didn't start until he was a junior. Both turned out to be pretty good players.
I hate tupid quaralls
Just easing the tension baby. Just easing the tension.
Someone has to since this thread's delved in to the Mat vs. Magnus throwdown over I can't even figure out what.
Remember when His Dudeness and Magnus used to have those epic slapfights?
Mat - I don't want to argue with you anymore, I just don't think you're very smart.
Nobody has a real issue with your revision of predictions.
It's that the evidence you use for those revisions is completely random.
No, it doesn't contradict what I just wrote. I said nobody has a problem with you revising predictions.
I never said that I would participate in such a revision. Because, like I said, it's stupid. We don't know enough about redshirt freshmen to determine whether they're deserving of their ratings.
When did I say that a true freshman has or hasn't lived up to his ranking? I didn't.
I disagree with C. Gordon, but I appreciate the analysis, caveated as it is
he dosen't have more offers than he has. Kid seems to have a ton of upside
Someone correct me if I heard wrong, but did he say we might take 3 TE's in this class. that seems like a lot with less than 20 openings.
The staff is saying that TE is a huge priority this year. He didn't mention a number, though.
Thanks, I don't know why I thought I heard 3.
Three is unlikely with the numbers we have available and the huge need we have on the offensive line. If attrition happens...who knows?
5-6 OL and possbily 2 TE's doesn't leave a lot of openings elsewhere on O. Could we possbily take more TE's than WR's in this class again.
The coaches have said they want 6 offensive linemen, yeah.
I think it's possible that we take more TE's than WR's, but not necessarily likely. I wouldn't be surprised to see 2 TE's and 2 WR's once the class expands a little bit.
could it be that the TEs req'd for manball need more time to beef up whereas WRs can often play as freshmen? so perhaps it is more urgent to get more TEs sooner.
I think it's possible, but my view on tight ends is that your third and fourth tight end don't have to be fully developed. If you keep a steady cycle of tight ends coming through, it's okay if #3 on the depth chart is, say, a redshirt freshman, as long as #1 and #2 have 3-4 years in the program. Ideally, I think TE is a position where you should take 1 every single year...
...which is why the TE position is screwy right now, because Rodriguez largely ignored it.
we have something like 12 receivers on the roster right now. Obviously we don't want the cupboard to go dry between years, but it seems like WR wouldn't warrant 2 schollies for this upcoming draft class. Of course, it is a skilled position and you always want to be bringing in the best at a skilled position. Just wondering if our current roster really warrants 2 schollies for this year at the WR position.
It's a worthwhile debate to have regarding how many WR's we want to take. We have solid numbers right now with 12 (13 if Miller moves back to WR). That said, more then half the receivers are upperclassmen, four of them graduating this year. And I forget the exact number but I believe the underclassmen have only 9 career catches.
I'm not sure there's room to take 2 WRs in this class, but then again I also felt we made a mistake not taking 1 last year, so 2 would be fine in my book. If we take 1 or *eep* 0, WR will be to next year's class what OL is to this year's class.
My feeling is that we could go this cycle without taking a WR if the class size remains at 16, but #17 and #18 should be wideouts as soon as a couple more spots open up (which they almost certainly will).
Could be a very busy week. Thompson, Ringer, and Bolden?
I hate 4 stars!!!!
Based on need at the TE position, I understand why 3 makes sense, but based on need everywhere else and available spots, I can't see 3 happening without a lot of attrition.
We'll take more than 3 DL, as we should. Last we took 3, none of them were true DTs and 2 of them are guys that have a long way to go to be starters. We need 2 DTs and probably 2 DEs. DL is way more important than an extra TE anyway.
We will probably never have a freshman, a converted WR and a 5th year senior as our only TE's. While Ricardo is learning and Barnett is a frosh, we'll still have Koger and Steve Watson with Brandon Moore, who will likely be the #2.
Then next fall we'll have Moore, Ricardo Miller who will be in his 3rd year in the program and second at TE, Chris Barnett as a sophomore (likely with some playing experience) and the freshmen. If we get 2 and they are both relatively highly rated guys (which they will be based on who's interested) at least one of them can come in and be the #4 guy.
Don't forget that we have a few walk-on TEs who will be upperclassmen after Koger and Watson leave who could see the field as a second TE in a blocking situation. Not all of the walk-ons, but whichever one or two of them are the best will come in at certain points.
The first and second team All-America tight ends in 2010 were 240 (Michael Egnew) and 241 (Lance Kendricks) pounds, respectively. Miller doesn't need to put on 35 pounds (which would make him 250) to be an effective TE. SDSU's starter was pretty effective in 2010, and he was only 229 (albeit in a weaker conference).
You literally said that Miller can't even be the backup tight end.
So Miller could possibly be an effective tight end...
...but he can't be the backup tight end.
Yeah, that makes sense.
Possible but even if we only take 2 this year, we still have 4 true TE's on the roster next year. That's workable and you can just take 1-2 more the next class. 3 in this class could happen but I think it's more likely we grab 2. You take 3 and all of a sudden half the class is TE's and OL.
Well, Ricardo Miller is listed as a TE on the Spring Roster so that makes 3 TEs, 2 true TEs.
It is nice to see attachments (x2). Well done...and thanks for posting.
he is a beast. go blue ron!
We'd love to have you, Ron! Michigan is a special place.
That would be a huge and much needed wideout to come here. Thompson and Ricardo Miller I have a feeling will be huge players for us in the future.
So Ringer is still announcing on the 15th, correct? That'd be a hell of a way to end the week.
Just the beginning of the...MEGA CLASS
So yeah, Michigan really needs some more tight ends for 2012 class.
Would be a nice pickup for the Wolverines, and boy won't Sparty be pissed...
Did sparty ever have a chance at landing him?
i'd rather take 4 LB's (ringer, bolden, james, royce jenkins) than taking 3 TE's.
chris brunett and frank clark seem like solid TE's and i believe ricardo miller can be a good one once he gains some weight.
we need more defense!
And Clark is coming in as a linebacker.
the team hasnt been practicing long, but i fully expect lots of attrition coming up.... at least three players..... maybe not until summer, but i think it is irrrational to think that everyone will stick around. so adjust your recruiting openings....
and to those of you with lots of mgopoints who think you have more credibility or say.... dont bother with your predictable "what makes you say that?..." crap as a reflex. if you have any perspective, then its quite obvious... there will be several players leaving the team prior to the fall, due to the new style of play, tough practices, projected playing time, etc.....
.....as you were..............
Three players doesn't qualify as "lots of attrition." If the number is only three, I will be very happy. Five or six seems about right to me. I won't start to stress until the number is higher than six: as long as Denard and Devin stay.
