here's one vote for "John Beilein's head in a Futurama jar"
So...3 spots left?
I think it's quite obvious that the panic button that everyone had been pressing has been thrown in the trash can for this years recruiting class.
I'm not panicking, but that would indeed be a reverse RichRod. We took a largely defensive class last year, so picking up only three offensive recruits would not be good. I don't expect this to happen at all, but it's the kind of thing that would inspire a light version of "A Decimated Offense" to be written.
*Shutters thinking of 2008*
i'll take an ok recruiting class out of this one but I'm really suprised michigan didn't learn the first time they recruited on side of the ball heavily and not the other. It will have negative effects in 3 years. (cough cough our D this year) ( i know GERG was the detinator of all the NUKs by Jhackney but they were also all young and inexperienced on that side of the ball) I would like to see our class finish strong and mostly on the offensive side. Maybe a DT in there (cooper please). But next year is the year I'm looking forward to. We need to see if hoke can generate the interest back into Michigan that use to be there. I would like another 2002/ 2003.
I don't think recruiting one side of the ball more heavily will have as big of an impact in 3 years as some think. For the first time in what seems like forever most of these guys will actually REDSHIRT. I know, can't believe it either. The fact that they will lessens the impact felt by recruiting because most classes will actually start to overlap one another.
By this I mean our elite recruits who play early will be Sophomores or Juniors playing with the previous class on the field as redshirt Sophmores and Juniors. These in coming recruits will actually have time to develop, so we don't have to hit a home run right away with each one. So thanks RR for leaving behind some talent.
I'm probably wrong about this, so please correct me, but wouldn't this make things worse? If we didn't redshirt many kids from last year's offensive class and we do redshirt kids from this group (and next year's group), that will be two years during which we'll have essentially no seniors. Am I missing something?
Nice post with some solid information and predictions. The problem with us taking that many offensive guys next year is that the 2012 class is loaded with defensive talent in both Michigan and Ohio. I agree we need some more skill postion players on offense, but I think you have to take the best available football player as long as you have a capable bodies at each position.
If we have 16 scholarships to give next year, we will not give one to a fullback.
Thanks for putting this together. It's a lot of work, could be a thread upon itself. Let's use your 16 schollie's, there is a lot of defensive talent in Mich and Ohio and it will be interesting who we get. I am not sure we need a RB next year, if we get Rawls this year. We do need a FB or TE/FB hybrid. We definitely needs some guards and absolutely need a QB.
Does anyone think Heitzman could fill this hybrid TE/FB position? It would make some sense since he seems to be a bit under sized on either side of the ball.
Why exactly do you think he's undersized? He's listed at 6'3", 237 on Rivals. The other services list his weight a little lower, but most of those are also pretty old, and kids this age put on weight pretty quickly. I'd be surprised if he showed up to Ann Arbor less than 235, and he could be over 240.
For a freshman DE, that's not undersized at all. It's not an instant playmaker, but it's bigger than Roh was when he showed up, and he started from day one.
That said, I'm not against trying him on offense as a tight end or H-back, but not because he's undersized.
He is far from being a little guy but he is not a monster either. Just a shot in the dark based on watching a little film on the kid is all. He is athletic and pretty physical at the point of attack and think he may fit this spot pretty well is more my point. At his current size you could put a few more pounds on him and he would be ideal for this position which is also very important in this offense. I think this kid has a ton of potential FWIW.
Assuming Bryant is ours (which, like, I though Frost and Zettel were ours too), I agree that Fisher, or a solid replacement OT, is more important than an additional CB. We have young DBs, we have DBs in this class already, I'd like more good corners, but OL is thin.
If we only get Bryant, Posada and Miller at OL in this class, we need 4 or 5 for sure in the next class.
I agree and I was too slow . I need to know more priorities, forget about work until after NSD.
Agree. IMHO, Fisher and Bryant are the most important. We will have more time to reassess after NSD.
Very nicely put together. I have checked out our depth chart and i agree with everything completely. I've also been a big believer of not rebuilding but reloading. What i mean by that and you kind of covered it with the redshirts, was that when our seniors graduate i would rather have a Jr or a Soph filling in than a Freshman stepping into a position that he isn't ready for. i know this isn't really possible with the player leaving and one sided recruiting over the last 4 to 5 years but that would be nice. That team down south is a perfect example of what im talking about. they always have someone to fill in after one guy graduates. I hope that will be out future.
Also, don't forget Kerrigan is a preferred walk on as a fullback this year.
That would be Joey Kerridge. I wish Ryan Kerrigan was available.
...We do apparently have Posada coming in and Jack Miller is expected to play OL (despite the recruiting sites listing him as a DT). If we do get Chris Bryant we will have some depth for the future.
Jack Miller is also on offense.
You greatly underestimate the MGoBlog community.
We keep countess. I don't think it's in the bag yet.
Assuming we fill out this class. How many scholarships do we have for next years class? 15? 20?
By my count, I think we'll have 16.
Has anyone left the program due to the coaching change? Other than Tate I can't think of anyone. If someone did that could free up another scholarship. As long as they're not a valuable assest to the program at this time.
because of the Hoke hiring. He was academically ineligible and did seem to want to sit behind Denard for the remainder of his career IF he was ever reinstated to the team.
Tate actually was excited to stay once he heard Hoke was here! Either way, wish him the best, but like RR would always say, we need to focus on "who" plays for Michigan!
Our team will improve, and next year we will see much better results in recruiting. However, I feel this year, we are walking away with some talented guys. Also, let's not forget...we still have some time left to improve.
I must say, pretty impressive to get 3 recruits to commit on your first weekend host. Well played Hoke.
With Forcier's departure, I believe we have 21 slots.
I don't think Barnett is coming to MI.
My guesses for the other spots are Rawls, Fisher, Cooper, and a QB. I'd like to get Raven and/or McClure, but I think they're longshots.
You think we keep Fisher?
I know...it's a little optimistic, but I'm hoping Hoke works his magic.
Do you know when Cooper is announcing? Is he waiting till Signing Day?
just kidding...i read somewhere that Tom Savage was denied permission to speak to Michigan in regards to a transfer. woulf he even an option? he was a pretty good ball player out of HS and was going well at Rutgers before he got hurt. anyone hear anything on this?
I hope you are counting the OP's assumption that Clark, Bryant, and Willingham are in the bag so to speak. If this is the case, who do you think ends up at TE, Clark, Heitzman, or Beyer?
all the posts and boards say theyre all being brought in as LBs or DE
I do not believe that Heitzman is being brought in as a LB. And if Beyer and Clark are both LBs, and we get Willingham, that would give us 5 linebackers in this class, 1 DE (assuming Rock is a DT) and no TE. If we don't sign a TE in this class, I would hope one of Heitzman, Clark or Beyer would move to TE. My preference, in order, would be Beyer, Clark, then Heitzman.
I've been saying since the FNL segments that Beyer would make a good TE.
all the posts and boards say theyre all being brought in as LBs or DE
Yeah, I'm including the OP's assumption.
Heitzman is the most likely to play TE, I think.
we steal cooper this late in the process? I hope you're right.
I think our shot is as good as anyone's. He's friends with Hollowell and Countess, too. That has to help, plus the whole Mattison connection.
whats your feeling on him? Do you think he stays with Michigan?
Yes, I think he'll stick with Michigan. I think he's a pretty good player. I'm looking forward to seeing him develop.
I would perfer getting McClure.
If one of those spots went to a QB, but hard to see UM picking one up in this class with so little time left. Here's hoping that Denard and Devin can hold up throughout the year.
There are 65 players returning that are on scholarship (including all 5th year Srs and Kovacs and K. Grady who were originally walk-ons now on scholarship); this number does not include scholarship-worthy walk-ons (including, but not limited to, FB McColgan, DE Heinenger, LB Leach, LS Primarco, SS F. Simmons, etc.).
So, with all 5th years returning (including M. Williams clearing medical), no transfers, but no scholarships to walk-ons, we could give out 20 scholarships and have the full 85.
So, you can see where we could get away with a class of @21-22 without a high risk of pulling a Miles-eviction.
But, please, don't take this post as an invitation to wish for, or predict, a tranfer of any players or claim which 5th yr seniors "deserve" to return. Everyone on the roster is a Michigan Man that deserves to stay. Just explaining the numbers game as it exists right now.
The 20th and 21st spots would have to be for a QB or a DT. I would prefer we don't even stretch it to 22 (although I think we could without any 85-roster issues)
Otherwise, I'd prefer we use any vacant spots on walk-ons and bank them for 2012.
Let's just oversign 'em