Stephen Hopkins Freep Article

Submitted by PF 34 on
http://www.freep.com/article/20100214/SPORTS06/2140534/?imw=Y Sorry, it's from the Free Press but still a good read nonetheless... For those of you who don't want to click, here are some good quotes. "I knew they ran the spread, and that was my biggest question coming up here," said the 225-pound Hopkins. "I'm a big guy, and a lot of people thought I'd be better in a pro-style offense. But I came up here, they explained the role to me, and I saw Brandon Minor, what he was when he was healthy, and it was an easy choice for me." "I want to get 5-6 yards every play," Hopkins said. "If I break a big one, I break a big one, but the biggest thing is to move the chains. That's what football is about. You can have the fast guys, you can have the small guys, but you still need a big guy in the Big Ten to get the hard yards, the tough yards."
MGoBoard

FingerMustache

February 15th, 2010 at 6:08 AM ^

he makes a good point though. That seems to be a legimate knock on backs like carlos brown and mike shaw, who are fast and deceptive but are usually tackled on first contact, so they either get 12 yards or 1 yard. Having a guy that can get 3-4 yards on every play is a valuable asset. (especially when its first and goal and carlos brown is the first option)

Joined: 02/17/2009

MGoPoints: 963

Hannibal.

February 15th, 2010 at 8:55 AM ^

This is why there is no such thing as a "spread tailback". If you can find holes and get yards after contact, you'll be a good back in any system. Same goes for pass blocking and pass receving.

Joined: 09/09/2008

MGoPoints: 9051

Kilgore Trout

February 15th, 2010 at 9:51 AM ^

I believe Threet would have done fine as a redshirt junior or senior in a typical pro-style attack. Obviously that wasn't the situation he was in, but I think it's a reasonable thing to say. I don't see any reason he wouldn't / couldn't have functioned on the same level as John Navarre.

Joined: 02/20/2009

MGoPoints: 13178

blueheron

February 15th, 2010 at 11:02 AM ^

To add to my earlier remark, I don't think Threet was anywhere near his ceiling. I just don't believe that he could have thrived in any offensive system at that stage of development. As for his ceiling, I was just remembering John Navarre in the first few games of the '00 (?) season when he was forced to play as a replacement for Henson. I think he did much better in those games than Threet did against, say, Toledo in '08. Threet had the physical tools (including an underrated sense of when to scoot) to be a decent chucker, but I think his field vision and touch were pretty bad.

Joined: 03/26/2009

MGoPoints: 30876

Hannibal.

February 15th, 2010 at 10:25 AM ^

I am not a big believer in the concept of "this guy is underrated because he fits perfectly into this system" with most players, but I do believe it with quarterbacks. Threet is an unknown because he never really got a fair chance in a system that fits him. He did look pretty bad throwing the ball, but maybe a good pro-style QB coach would have had him working on his throwing mechanics instead of the read option.

Joined: 09/09/2008

MGoPoints: 9051

Raback Omaba

February 15th, 2010 at 11:34 AM ^

I'm happy to have made this my claim to fame in the MGoBlog community... Demar Dorsey is now my favorite player 1B (next to Martavious Odoms' 1B) due to my "connection" with him. Just to be clear, the Dorsey thing wasn't a prediction....it was a statement based on knowledge made available to me by credible sources. I wouldn't make a pie in the sky prediction to stir things up here........not my style.

Joined: 03/07/2009

MGoPoints: 1629

jabberwock

February 15th, 2010 at 10:36 AM ^

to me, Michigan running backs and good pass blocking have ALWAYS been synonymous. Carr was known to yank backs and receivers instantly for poor pass blocking. I don't think we've been near as effective at it so far in the RR era. Don't know all of the reasons, but I'm sure the coaches focus on it, it's not like blocking isn't important in the spread.

Joined: 07/04/2008

MGoPoints: 51146

Tater

February 15th, 2010 at 1:37 PM ^

My impression has been that downfield blocking has been one of the strengths of the young recieving corps. AFAIC, the too-young-and-therefore-too-small OL, the injuries to Molk and Forcier, and the swiss cheese defense were the biggest part of the ineffectiveness of the team last year. Thankfully, it has all been adressed this year. UM football will be back where it belongs this season.

Joined: 08/13/2008

MGoPoints: 30584