I agree on the subject of Isaac vs. the other guys. I don't see a true gamebreaker out of Green, Smith, Shallman, Rawls, Hayes, etc. I also wouldn't say Isaac is the best gamebreaking back in the country (I would have preferred Altee Tenpenny, Justin Davis, or a couple others), but Isaac has more big play ability than Green and those Michigan players/commits.
Scouting Report: Derrick Green
Do you believe you have to have a "game-breaker" to win on the national level? Loaded question but a bad-ass line with a number of big to bigger powerful guys that should be able to get you 4 yards minimum isn't a bad formula IMO. Can the "game-breaker" be played by the Norfleets, Hayes' of the world when you get them in the open? Does it have to be the RB?
I think you have to have a gamebreaker somewhere, whether it's at running back, wide receiver, punt returner, cornerback, something. As far as I can remember, the national championship teams have had at least one guy on either side of the ball (usually offense) who was a superstar and a guy who could make big plays at any given time. Alabama had Trent Richardson and Mark Ingram, USC had Reggie Bush, Michigan had Charles Woodson, Auburn had Cam Newton, Texas had Vince Young, Florida had Tebow/Harvin, etc.
I don't see a real gamebreaker out of this group of running backs, but maybe that can be LaQuon Treadwell if he commits, or Alvin Bailey.
Hell, I think Michigan is going to be able to compete with just about anyone with these offensive linemen they're recruiting. But when you're trying to win a national championship, sometimes you just need a guy who you know is going to pull out a big play, score a touchdown, etc. We might have that guy on defense (maybe it's Jourdan Lewis or Dymonte Thomas), but it's tough to win without a superstar.
EDIT: I don't think Hayes can be that guy, but maybe Norfleet as a returner.
Out of curiousity, and by no means does this leave me with the expectation of a national championship this year, but had we had a slightly better supporting cast and less holes; would Denard be a gamechanger big enough for a national championship?
Edit: breaker not changer
He has the potential, I guess, but not when he's throwing 15 picks...and that doesn't have much to do with his supporting cast. In fact, Hemingway and Roundtree probably saved him from throwing 17 or 18 picks.
Denard would need a ton of help to win a national championship, because he has a history of throwing too many interceptions and fumbling too much. If we had Alabama's offensive line and defense, then we could just run the ball all day and not count on him to throw the ball for us to win. Unfortunately, we've got an iffy center, a hole at left guard, a questionable defensive line, mediocre wide receivers, and a solid but unspectacular defensive backfield.
I agree that Isaac wasn't the most "game breaker" type back, but he certainly had that capability and was probably the best of those that Michigan had a chance to get. Having a game breaker certainly helps, because it keeps the defense that much more on their toes, making them play probably a bit more timid. You could have one on defense too. But remember that OSU won a national championship with Clarett, who runs somewhat similar to Smith in that he doesn't have great speed, but could cut and use his hands to make tackles miss, and had a little power to his game. I'm sure there are other cases, but that's the first that jumped to mind.
I believe, as long as you have a stout defense and a QB that needs to be respected (ala Alabama 3 years ago, though I don't believe a defense needs to be quite that good to be successful either) you can win. Texas won based off Vince Young (bad example because he's a once in a lifetime type player) and Colt McCoy (better example) and not much of a running game after Benson left. There are lots of ways to be successful, but at least some balance and a good defense is required in my opinion.
I think this is the approach. It doesn't have to be the RB. -it helps but it isn't the only position it can come from. Would we consider Hart a "game-breaker"? I'm not sure, but his style was perfect for those years. In past years were the "game-breakers" a product of the offense and scheme or purely singular talent?
Green will be an asset no question. For 13 I'm happy with Smith/Shallman if that is what is to be. Obviously the upperclassmen will have a couple that rise to the top and are studs in their own right.
Why can't Kyle Bosch be our "game-breaker" for this year : )
That's the thing about Hart - he was never a gamebreaker. He was a very good college player, but he wasn't a big play guy. He was a guy who would turn a 4-yard gain into a 6-yard gain or an 8-yard gain into a 12-yard gain. But we also never won on a national level during his tenure. Michigan's best season was 2006, when we lost a close one to OSU and then got trounced in the Rose Bowl to finish 11-2.
It's hard to fault Hart in any way for us not "winning on a national level." We were good while he was here, and if you were to list the positions that held us back during that time, RB wouldn't have been high on that list, if on it at all.
I'm not blaming Hart at all. All I'm saying is that there are/were more dynamic players around the country. I think Hart gave 100% of what he could, and he should be lauded for that.
He got so many first downs on his own personal effort it was incredible. And that helped make Michigan a very good team while he was here. Moving the ball on long sustained drives has been a big problem for Michigan in the last 4 years. So, if Green can help us get back to that, that's huge by itself.
But with two spots open and a lot of time before NSD, I would like to see what happens to other recruits (Issac).
Um, "Issac" committed to USC. I'm not sure that holding spots for guys happily committed to other schools is a winning recruiting strategy, especially when someone as promising as Green is available.
I honestly feel that Hoke might need to extend a few more offers to fill the 2013 class, we might land one out of the Treadwell/Green/Mathis group, but that's about it. So in case of any decommits from the class, we will end up in a similar situation as the end of the 2012 recruiting cycle.
I think LT still needs to be priority #1, but this kid looks like he's about 5 lbs. shy of Bo Jackson. I don't think he would overtake an upperclassman Rawls for the #1 spot, but we would have great depth at RB for a couple years before Green eventually takes over.
If he's as good as advertised (always a huge if with prospects no matter how good they are), he should get immediate playing time as a freshman. Experience just doesn't matter all that much for running backs and WRs.
I would probably agree with you, but that depends heavily on who else is here. If Toussaint returns in 2013 and Rawls is still here, those are probably your top two backs. There wouldn't be much room for a third guy to get carries unless he's a third-down back like Smith/Hayes...and Green is the opposite of that. I kind of expect Toussaint to leave after 2012, so that's probably a moot point, though.
Is that you, Coach Fred Jackson?
Bo Jackson ran a 10.39 100m in track (at a meet), supposedly ran a 4.12 40. Smith may come close physique-wise, but Bo was a once in a generation athlete.
Lol, no I don't see any comparison to Bo outside of his physique. But, I'll save my final judgement when I see Green try to break a bat accross his knee and run on the left field wall ninja style. I'll settle for Green running the ball 29 straight times against Wisconsin.
Im betting that was hand timed..
Bo Jackson was better. Derrick Green is no Bo Jackson.
Bo doesn't know orange hair.
Green definitely has an extra gear maybe 2 that Smith doesn't possess.... That said I don't think I've seen any Michigan recruit violently break tackles the way Smith does. Maybe Brandon Minor (when he wasn't hurt)... Anyone speak to how Green and Smith's competition stack up?
Green's competition is significantly better. Bigger schools and better athletes. Hermitage is almost twice as large as Howland.
I really, really want a back that has the ability to wear down a defense as the game goes on....
As much as I like Fitz...He doesnt seem to have the ability to physically dominate a defense....
Even if Derrick Green doesnt juke and jive around the field...He is not slow by any means, and when he is getting his 25th carry in the 4th quarter, that defense is going to be sick and tired of getting trucked....
I appreciate the people who are defending me on here. I really do.
But you're probably wasting your metaphorical breath. Mr. Rager enjoys criticizing TTB and Tremendous (and perhaps other free blogs). I don't know exactly why, and honestly I don't care. But it probably won't stop anytime soon, so I'm just going to try to ignore him in the meantime.
You're really Mr. Rager too, and have been posting to make yourself look like the sympathetic figure.
I'm on to you.
Nah...I'm actually M-Wolverine. I just figured people would get jealous if I had racked up almost 57,000 points and surpassed Brian, so I split my posts up equally between the two accounts.
Oops... ignore this.
EDIT: Actually, I just passed 2000 points. You're welcome, America.
planning to celebrate your 2,000 point milestone?
I'm not really M-Wolverine too. Though it would be kinda funny if it happened twice this summer.
I respect Magnus' opinion and enjoy reading his report's.
The 1 thing IMO that stuck out where I have a difference of opinion is where it's stated that he doesn't go side to side well and make people miss.
The only highlight film I watched of him is the 1 posted on Touch the Banner site; but from that it appeared to me he does a good job of making people miss in the open field.
If we were evaluating the defensive backs in that film we would be critisizing them for missed open field tackles. IMO the thing that he does is to do enough to make them miss without exagerating the motion necessary to accomplish that. It's a quck step to the side and and get's going north & south quckly again.
Yeah, he doesn't seem to use alot of waisted motion. He kind of reminds me of Beanie Wells a little bit. He's not going to go into a game looking to break ankles, but if he has a little bit of space he can make a safety bite on a move and break a long run (sigh).
What it looks like to me, because Green is so big, is that the DBs are attempting to take him down low. This gets them in bad position when Green does is slight cut. It will still work from time to time in college because he's still going to be a big, fast back, but not as often.
It's not really a side to side motion, and with a guy his size you really don't want a ton of that anyway. You want someone that big and fast going north and south fast.
He does keep his shoulders square and get upfield pretty well. I don't want him dancing. But there are several occasions where a guy is coming straight at him and Green does virtually nothing to avoid the contact - no stiff arm, no lateral jump, etc. I understand that you want him going north and south, but I would like to see more than straight-ahead bulldozing, too.
I'll take Green's downhill running and let Shane and the recievers be game breakers.
A pocket quarterback can't do it on his own...and that's the reason so many people want Treadwell - because there appears to be no gamebreaking receiving on the roster or committed right now. I would be glad to be wrong, and there are a couple freshmen we haven't seen on the field (Chesson, Darboh), but the 2013 wide receivers are more possession/red zone guys than catch-and-run guys.
here's to hoping Treadwell does his walk about the country and finds his spiritual animal is a wolverine.
Thanks for writing this up. Good stuff.
You're welcome...and thanks.
It was a good read and I agree with your assessments (particularly the weaknesses) based on my limited view of just his game film. With that said, a downhill runner behind a good line can be a great thing and he does look like he has some explosiveness to him. I'm going on a limb here, but I think his ceiling is a Ty Wheatley kind of back.
Wheatley was a very good sprinter. I don't see Green having that kind of top-end speed, but it's probably a pretty fair comparison with that caveat.
And the track speed. That's why he was such a beast. (And why I'm still hoping whoever our next back is the next Tyrone Wheatley).
One of the things that I did like in the film was Green's acceleration and his ability to blow past at least the initial blocks. Behind the right offensive line, I think we're still talking about some pretty good production in an RB if, as you mention, he lets blocking develop. I did like the Clay / Hill comparison - that's actually where my mind went when thinking of a relatively recent analog to what Green appears to be.