V. Smith Evaluations
This is going to be a P. Griffin grind my gears rant.
I'm amazed at the criticism of V. Smith. Just so everyone knows he was playing on a knee that had ACL surgery 8 months before the season started. It would have been easy for him to say well my knee isn't quite right I'll take my redshirt and get back in shape, but no he fought like hell to get back on the field. Who knows if he should have played or not last year, but the fact was that he earned PT over healthier options. This should be applauded not torn apart. His internet aproval rating would have been much better served by being lazy and not even trying to play last year. How nuts is that?
The other criticism is that he's too small. Of all schools we should be the last ones to question a rb's height. Have we forgotten who we are? M. Hart and J. Morris are not all over the record books of Michigan?
I'm all for debate over who's the best rb, but you can't use last years performance from a guy playing at maybe 70-80% as your argument. Go back to those spring videos his 1st year or his play against OSU before he blew out his knee. That's a different guy than we saw last year. I may be one of the few that have seen good things in a lot of our backs when they were healthy and think we will be pleasantly surprised this year whoever emerges from the competition.
My money is on M. Shaw, I still think he has the best combo of burst and toughness, but I'm not basing that on V. Smith's performance last year. The fucking kid was a warrior and we're dissing him because he had the toughness to play on 1 leg?
Agree but I'd also add it was his ability to always get something out of nothing - even if that something was just a couple yards. Also, he almost always seemed to fall forward when being tackled which usually means an extra yard or two on the carry.
April 13th, 2011 at 11:26 AM ^
I'm beginning to learn that if there is a 'little guy' who is being bashed, rightly or wrongly, Ziff is the one who stands up for him. I wonder if he just likes to take a contrary position on any given topic.
In this case, however, I agree absolutely. Before his ACL tear, I remember being very excited about Smith. Last season, when Smith got the ball and got stuffed, it seemed that more often than not it was not his fault. The best back in the world can't go through a hole that isn't there. Yes, there were a few times last year when I wished that he was a step faster, but his toughness in running and especially in blocking have been impressive considering the kid is only 5'6" and recently had surgery on an ACL tear.
April 13th, 2011 at 12:10 PM ^
Leave my Napolean Complex out of this. I can say that I do get agitated with popular themes that I think are flat wrong. I have no problem with people saying they don't think V Smith is the guy or they think someone else is better, but for people on here to say he went down easily last year, I would say yeah he did. My only question is how many guys would not go down easily coming off surgery and missing 4-5 months of workouts?
April 13th, 2011 at 11:34 AM ^
I feel the same way as the OP about Ezeh, who got some of the same treatment Smith is getting. OE played through back problems his last couple years and got nothing but grief from the fans.
April 13th, 2011 at 11:35 AM ^
Nobody has ever questioned Smith's heart or toughness. I don't know why you're railing against that aspect. You're preaching to the choir. If you find a post where people question his effort, that will be the first I've seen.
People question his skill. And there is good reason for that.
You're comparing him to Jamie Morris and Mike Hart. Which is great. Maybe the comparison will be more apt when Smith averages 5.0 yards a carry like Hart or 5.4 like Morris. Or when Smith runs for 100 yards against someone other than Delaware State. Otherwise, I don't think it's out of line for Michigan fans to question the abilities of Smith.
April 13th, 2011 at 12:01 PM ^
The reason Morris and Hart are mentioned, as the OP stated, is that size is not an indicator of ability, not that Smith is as good as those backs. The most common criticism of Smith that I have seen is not that he is a bad player or unskilled, but that he's simply too small.
April 13th, 2011 at 12:10 PM ^
Size most definitely IS an indicator of ability. It may not be the only indicator, but there's a reason that the majority of successful backs in college and the NFL are bigger than Smith, Morris, and Hart. They are exceptions.
April 13th, 2011 at 12:04 PM ^
Peoples biases always cloud the point. Magnus I know you don't like V. Smith and you like Cox. People bag on you for that so as soon as you see V. Smith you get defensive.
Magnus you are one of the few people I can say has a valid argument because you have never liked V. Smith. As a freshmen you were not impressed. That is fine it's not personal you made an evaluation on some limited reps of a healthy player.
The point is that people think V. Smith can't break arm tackles or get tough yards because of what they saw last year and that is flat wrong. Evaluating a kid playing at 70% and then projecting that out is silly. All I'm saying is watch the kid this year and make your determination. He may not be able to break tackles, but to determine that based on a guy playing thru injury is stupid.
Seriously take this example. Pretend you are in a Calculus class. You get seriously ill and you can't attend class for 3 weeks. You get back to class and you have 3 days before the 1st exam. You work night and day trying to catch up on what you missed. The big day comes and you post a 73%. You keep working the rest of the smester and you work your way back to a B- grade. At the end of the semester the teacher tells you that you should probably give up on math you don't seem to excel, but he encourages the student who the same thing happened to last semester but he just dropped the class and showed up this semester. Do we know who the better student is in this scenario? No. Do we know who the tougher kid is? Yes.
Give the kid some time. We'll know soon enough.
April 13th, 2011 at 12:14 PM ^
I think people's evaluations of Smith are based on not only 2010, but also what they saw in 2009, though. So yes, he does still have time to improve - and I'm not saying he won't do some good things down the road - but as someone said above:
In 2009 the excuse was that he was a freshman, in 2010 the excuse was that he had a torn ACL. At some point, maybe the fact is that he's just not very good.
April 13th, 2011 at 12:28 PM ^
Magnus, I think you give "people" too much credit. Most peoples "evaluations" revolve around him getting 35 yds on 13 carries in a loss last year not his actual skill set which you actually look at.
I think if you go back to the enthusiasm meter for Smith back in November of 09, it was way higher than it currently sits. You were the lone wolf in the woods saying he wasn't all that great. I think the majority now agree with you. It's because of 2010 not 09 why people have given up on him.
"OSU and Wisconsin had very tough defenses in 2009" OMG.
It's probably time to just flat out admit Rodriguez's Pahokey infatuation hasn't yielded Pa-DOOKY.
Smith is here and playing simply because UM had no other options.
He should be enjoying a fine career at CENTRAL Michigan these days.
Really good shutdown defenses tend to be really good at shutting everyone down. I don't hear anyone chastizing Mike Hart for being shut down by OSU in 04 and 07 or USC in the same year. As far as your other comments, you are either 12 years old, or stupid. We've recruited four players out of Pahoke since 2008.
1. Martavious Odoms was the leading offensive producer in his true freshman year and has significantly contributed when not injured the other two.
2. Vincent Smith started half of his games as a true freshman and more than half as a sophomore.
3. Richard Ash redshirted as a freshman.
4. I'll give you Hawthorne as a bust.
Your comments are pashitty.
April 13th, 2011 at 12:52 PM ^
getting sick and missing class is one thing. that shouldn't affect one's brain for the long-term should it?
now tearing up your knee can leave serious doubts about one's future.
i know. i've torn up both knees playing basketball. not even close to 100% back.
though never a great player, i was relegated to playing 16 inch softball here in chicago. since retired from that too. though people are trying to get me to unretire.
I'll grant that Smith looked quicker in 2009 - I bet that knee injury did slow him down a bit last year. But I also remember a back who got driven sideways or backwards with any significant contact in 2009.
Vincent Smith is never going to be powerful enough to run between the tackles effectively against good defenses. If he regains his burst and agility, he'll be a really useful back in certain situations. The funny thing is, I think that this is something close to a consensus on this board, yet every time this issue comes up it's a huge debate.
Backs who aren't 100% aren't less productive because their legs aren't strong enough, it's that they don't trust their knees not to give out again while making a cut. It's a psychological issue, not a physical one. If he wasn't physically 100%, they wouldn't have played him for fear of reinjury.
April 13th, 2011 at 11:42 AM ^
These Smith "Arguments" consistently devolve into two sides that are pretty much saying the same damn thing, but typing too loud to realize it.
I don't think EITHER side feels like he should ideally be the primary running back.
So what's the disagreement?
April 13th, 2011 at 11:47 AM ^
Blame. As in, who's to blame for Smith's overuse? Is it the players who can't unseat him or the coaches who refuse to use fully capable players (in the fan's eyes) the proper amount?
April 13th, 2011 at 11:54 AM ^
Well, I think it's pretty clear that we don't have a 1999/2000 Thomas, a 2004/2006 Hart, a 2003 Perry. So I think part of the issue is that people are used to Michigan having that - it didn't exist on last year's roster, and probably doesn't on this year's.
I think part of it was injury: Shaw and Toussaint probably missed on some carries due to being hurt.
I think we can all agree that this OL wasn't the 1997-2003 variety, either. I recall Smith plunging for several 2 yard runs where I'm not sure what else he could have really done.
Rodriguez's choice is the big question, I guess - but at that point it's just useless speculation. Did he have better options? Maybe?
Let's stipulate for the sake of argument that Cox is just better than Smith. I seem to recall him making a "good fucking riddance" tweet after RR was canned (not a direct quotation) - it seems pretty likely that Cox was something of a malcontent or complainer. My point is that there are factors other than onfield ability that could have hampered his depth chart placement.
April 13th, 2011 at 12:55 PM ^
i'm sure RR was purposely not playing that heisman RB he had on the bench; didn't want to detract from Denard.
I don't remember every word of Cox's message, but it did include "Dick Rod."
So he's obviously a wordsmith.
BTW, I haven't been on the board too much lately - when did you start showing up regularly again, ChiTown? Score one for reasonable, logical debate and the capacity for abstract thought. Good to have you back.
April 13th, 2011 at 11:50 AM ^
So what's the disagreement?
I think what you're forgetting is this is the internet, we are all bored and live in our Mother's basements. Being E-loud is the only way we can get attention.
April 13th, 2011 at 12:05 PM ^
April 13th, 2011 at 12:12 PM ^
Can we put this argument to bed with the consensus opinion of :
"Vinny Smits: Rad Dude. Good blocker and receiver. Has some real limitations too. Hopefully by some combination of his improvement and better alternatives, we have better RB production next year."
And then never talk about it again?
April 13th, 2011 at 12:15 PM ^
I love the little guy's heart, but if he was truly playing at 70-80% of his physical capacity, I would rather see the young man take his redshirt and come back strong, particularly since he was just a sophomore anyway. I say that from two perspectives, one being the "he's a young man that has a long life ahead of him and needs to be healthy", and "I'm a crazy Michigan football fan who wants the most effective players on the field". I didn't always feel like last year's Vincent Smith was that choice, though evidently the coaching staff did not solicit my opinion.
April 13th, 2011 at 12:20 PM ^
I agree with Mangus. Smith is tough and has heart but just isn't a very good runningback. Go back and watch games of him. How many extra yards does he actually earn? Tackles he breaks? Actually coverts a 3rd and 1? Many of his quality runs are because of the O-line and respect for Robinson.
And for people that say "look at him in practice!" It is spring practice. Tacklng is bad in the spring and it is against the 110th ranked defense last year. Everyone did that, even UMass.
April 13th, 2011 at 12:37 PM ^
He may be for certain plays, but if a lot of plays are "3 yards and a cloud of dust" I think his size won't help when you're running into a pile of 300 pounders. He may be more effective in some of the spread plays they'll keep where he has room to scoot or as a slot receiver. The biggest job Borges has is finding plays to fit the talent he has which is why I think we'll have real hybrid offense this year with all sorts of different looks - which could be a real good thing since we all know, as with investing, diversity is key. The one thing I've always cringed at over the years of watching M football is the predictability. Keep the D guessing.
April 13th, 2011 at 12:48 PM ^
I really don't have a horse in this race - none of the RBs have impressed me since Minor, and even that was fleeting. Smith is probably going to be the de-facto starter over the summer unless Cox somehow proves he can actually stay on the field and produce, not just look great in a uniform. At this point, though, it is going to take time to get legit backs in this offense, something RR was trying to do as well but never could (he obviously had some chances at the end, but, you know...), and expecting anybody to emerge on the same level of a Hart, Perry, or Thomas is just crazy. Let the record show, though, that I was there when B.J. Askew was the featured back and UM puttered along fine. Smith is a hard worker and a good kid by all accounts, and I'm sure he'll put up decent numbers platooning with Cox, Rawls, Hopkins, etc. But unless he really takes a step forward like Perry did as an upperclassmen, or if he truly was suffering from an injury and the maturation and rehab transforms him into a better player than we saw the past couple of years, I expect him to have a solid season but nothing spectacular.
April 13th, 2011 at 12:59 PM ^
hell, i still think he's in the NFL, so i hope you're not bashing his ability with that comment. but as a HB, he did make a good FB.
Nothing seems to send this board into argumentitiveness like a player with less than 4-star talent who plays with more than 4-star heart. Vincent Smith, however, is hardly Kovacsican in talent. Rather, I think the loss of production last season was due more to where the tackles were coming from (in front of him).
Like Chitown, I formed a strong opinion of him watching his play against Wisconsin and Ohio State late his freshman year.
He didn't look then like a guy who would get stopped dead on contact with a medium Big Ten linebacker. In fact (after being sprung by one of the best sustained WR blocks I've ever seen) he absorbed an attempt to knock him out of bounds and picked up a few more:
And as for pure Rodriguez-Get-Me-Some-Of-That jackrabbittyness:
And I was a believer.
I don't know if he was playing not 100% last year, but I did seem to notice he was taking tackles head-on, which at his size is going to get him nowhere because physics.
His usefulness seems to be that quick twitch plus acceleration that makes him a tough target to tackle. This was the secret to Hart and Morris too: not electrifying, Denard-like hippity hops but a smooth and effortless small-cut followed by a fast burst of speed that turns a linebacker in his face into a linebacker trying to tackle his ankles. When you saw Hart burrowing for extra yards with two linebackers and a safety on his back, it was strength, yes, but it's also easier to move forward with weight on your back than when you're meeting an object larger than you head-on. The way to turn defenders is to be able to change direction and accelerate. None of these guys would be successful at RAGE.
Since he had it before and didn't have it last year, I'm willing to believe that was injury based. The acceleration that gave him those big plays before just wasn't there. But then again my bias was set in stone in late '09.
Anyway getting that kind of twitch/accelerate back after what he went through may not be possible, and without it Brian's right that he's just a guy. Big Ten linebackers are hardly unathletic themselves.
Another consideration is that we keep seeing practice footage of Vincent Smith in the I-form, but as you can see in the clips above, when he was 100%, he seemed to be the most effective when given space.
Misopogon you just could not let this die could you?
This will bring Magnus back from the dead.
Yes, yes, and yes. These are all plays that set up well for Smith. He gets on the edge, can use his change of direction, and create angles that are favorable for someone with such a low center of gravity. This is how he should be used.
I am certainly in favor of using him out of the shotgun, to catch swing passes, to catch screens, etc.