Should we use our last available offer? On this guy?
RR stated earlier that UM had one additional offer it could extent... but not sure if it would.
On UM's Scout page they reference this:
http://michigan.scout.com/a.z?s=162&p=8&c=1&nid=2917118
So, he's an NG (6'1 325 true NG) from Trotwood-Madison (Shaw, Roundtree, Moore).
Considering we have only two true NG's on our roster, and that Sagesse is a Senior... should we use the last offer on a much needed position for a guy from an Ohio pipeline?
Or, hope we get a couple NGs next year that are ready to step in behind Campbell for immediate playing time?
(I'm not predicting, just wondering if it would be a good option) Discuss...
February 3rd, 2010 at 11:20 PM ^
Conditioning?
February 3rd, 2010 at 11:22 PM ^
Just because the dudes 6'1" 325 doesnt mean hes good. Also, I am sure RR and co. had a chance to see him while they were scouting the other T-M recruits.
February 3rd, 2010 at 11:31 PM ^
I'd rather we save this offer for a EE next year. As this season shakes out we can see where we still have need and then try to get kids to EE in those areas. So I see more value in saving it for next year.
Edit:
Since this kid means:
1. The problem isn't academics. Some school with lower academic standards would have found a way in for a 325 lb 6' 1" DT.
2. I also wonder about skill. At 325, even if he was out of shape and not terribly good, he could still likely push people around in less competitive D-II or D-III teams. Being a big, honking roadblock will get you somewhere in life, at least at a lower level of play.
So this means either truly inexcusable academics, a total lack of conditioning or a major character problem of some sort. I also note he doesn't appear to have camped at all, if the man didn't even get camp love it means a lot of coaches know something unattractive about him.
February 4th, 2010 at 12:18 AM ^
Due to signing a full class this year, we won't have the ability to to back date a recruit next year. Next year's recruits count for next year only. But what do I know, I'm piss drunk from celebrating the addition of Dorsey!
February 4th, 2010 at 8:12 AM ^
Back dating is only an issue if you are going to exceed the 25 player per season cap on recruits. We will be lucky to have room for 16 next year.
February 3rd, 2010 at 11:26 PM ^
Could be slated as a walk-on candidate
February 3rd, 2010 at 11:31 PM ^
no problem with out of state tuition at UM................
February 3rd, 2010 at 11:28 PM ^
If the staff was skeptical of giving Hankins an offer, I'm sure they would be even more skeptical of offering this guy.
With a limited number of scholarships available next year, they need to conserve.
February 3rd, 2010 at 11:28 PM ^
6'1" and 325 as a HS senior does not bode well. He's probably not going to grow 2-3 more inches, and the 325 is on the heavy side... Seantrel Henderson is listed at 6'"8 and 301 for reference.
February 4th, 2010 at 2:19 AM ^
http://minnesota.scout.com/a.z?s=176&p=8&c=1&nid=3199305
Weight depends on how you carry it, but this guy would have gotten more attention if he carried it in a football frame like Seantrel's IMO.
February 4th, 2010 at 7:57 AM ^
Seantrel is also 7" taller than this kid too. 6'1", 325 and 6'8" and 335 are very different due to the height and frame.
February 3rd, 2010 at 11:34 PM ^
...that's about it
February 3rd, 2010 at 11:54 PM ^
Uh, don't Martin, Campbell and Sagesse all play NT right now?
And isn't Sagesse a RS junior?
February 4th, 2010 at 12:02 AM ^
Sagesse is a true Senior.
Martin is a DT), like Ash, Black, and Talbott. Ability to play the run and pass rush
Banks, who is a DT may be able to spell Campbell, but he's a 5th yr either way
NG is our run stopping plug in the middle. There has been talk about moving Van Bergen to the inside with Martin on pass plays and taking Campbell out in order to get more of a pass rush. We didn't have that plug last year and you could see our two DTs pushed into the second level at times. Campbell's development, and the getting depth behind him, is huge for 2010-2011
February 4th, 2010 at 12:50 AM ^
If they didn't offer Hankins until way late, there is no way they are offering a 6'1 325 guy. I don't know how you could be in good shape at that weight.
February 4th, 2010 at 8:06 AM ^
We still offered Johnathan Hankins, and he wasn't slim by any means. People who are using size as the only negating factor are ignoring recent behavior by the coaches.