Vlad Emilien to start Saturday?
Pretty reliable poster on Scout ($$) says someone else may be starting at safety over Mike Williams. Emilien?
http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=162&f=1088&t=5107773
EDIT: I'm a loser, and didn't even think of Brandon Smith.
November 13th, 2009 at 8:18 AM ^
Good! Williams just isn't getting it done.
November 13th, 2009 at 8:19 AM ^
Williams is the one guy on defense that I single out every single Saturday. Vlad can't be worse.
November 13th, 2009 at 8:21 AM ^
It looks like Brandon Smith.
November 13th, 2009 at 8:25 AM ^
I've been wondering why the haven't given him a shot.
November 13th, 2009 at 8:29 AM ^
he had been moved to LB in fall practice and before last week moved back to Safety
November 13th, 2009 at 6:56 PM ^
Is he not fast enough to play safety? I'm really asking, I don't know.
November 13th, 2009 at 10:09 PM ^
It's not a matter of straight-line speed as much as it is reaction time, change of direction, and hip fluidity. He's just not someone you want covering receivers in open space.
November 13th, 2009 at 10:14 AM ^
Maybe Brandon Smith is the gamer we have been looking for. Apparently all these other guys practice well and it ends at that. Give him a chance, lets see what the kid can do.
November 13th, 2009 at 11:05 AM ^
Agree - alot of guys don't really show what they are made of until they step on the field come gameday. That is why I am all for sticking someone else back there just to give them a shot. Can't hurt. Go blue.
November 13th, 2009 at 8:26 AM ^
Why the hell not? Right?
November 13th, 2009 at 8:47 AM ^
I'm hoping to see Brandon Smith back there - I mean - his name is Brandon right? Aren't all Brandon's the shit?
November 13th, 2009 at 10:15 PM ^
The one's who wear #4 even more so.
November 13th, 2009 at 8:58 AM ^
B Smith has been kicking serious ass on special teams. Even if he only plays a few series, it would be a good reward for making so many tackles and busting his ass every week.
November 13th, 2009 at 9:08 AM ^
I can see it now. Brandon Smith gets back there, holds down the position and looks Big Ten Caliber. Our defense plays the best game it's played in two years, and everybody will be asking where Smith has been all year calling into question the coaches ability to recognize talent.
November 13th, 2009 at 9:22 AM ^
I completely agree. If whoever they put in there plays well (and it would be hard to play worse) people will be wondering why we waited so long.
November 13th, 2009 at 9:48 AM ^
The thing that always bugged me about the situation is that whenever BSmith has come in for spot play, he has looked really fast. Or at least fast enough if he can play smart football. I'm really excited to see him in action.
November 13th, 2009 at 11:02 AM ^
If that is the case with Smith and I hope it to be so that he is wildly successful. This would be a person who was deemed not capable of playing the position and we waited until the second to the last game of the season to "try it out" while getting killed on a weekly basis with our safety play. Gibson would sort of be setting himself up for that one with the second guessing regardless of what coaches are "seeing in practice".
November 13th, 2009 at 12:41 PM ^
...a second guess of the coaching if it means getting Williams off the field
November 13th, 2009 at 9:09 AM ^
Absolutely anyone is deserving of a shot over Williams. He has single handedly blown coverage and given up TD's so many times. I would put almost ANY DB back there over him, how much worse could it be? Vlad, Smith, just someone who isn't Williams.
November 13th, 2009 at 9:25 AM ^
Williams hasn't had deep responsibility all that much. He's definitely given up a few, and certainly is playing in a position that isn't best for him. However, go back and look at the UFR's, and you'll find out on most of the big plays there are 3-4 guys all missing coverage assignments or tackles. Has he made mistakes? Absolutely. But he's not the only reason most of those plays went big.
November 13th, 2009 at 9:50 AM ^
lot of Mike Williams bashing going on here that is unnecessary. He's not perfect. But he's young. He has made some bad plays. But the reason he's playing already is becuase we can't play Woolfolk at safety.
If you want to call out the D, please do. I don't think it's fair to Mike Williams or the coaches to paint him as the only or primary goat here.
November 13th, 2009 at 9:59 AM ^
He's also played under 3 different coordinators and played like 4 positions. It's not easy and add that with still being young and it's a bad combination.
November 13th, 2009 at 10:06 AM ^
Yes, other people on defense have been bad, but that doesn't mean I can't state that Williams is playing bad. He is responsible for two or three TD's against Iowa, several of the Juice Williams big runs, and an assortment of other blown coverages. You don't have to be the deep safety to have blown coverage. He gets sucked into PA all the time and leaves TE's that are his responsibility wide open. Having three different defensive cordinators has nothing to do with whether or not you can read a fake handoff.
November 13th, 2009 at 1:14 PM ^
I don't know...A tackle is a tackle.
November 13th, 2009 at 9:16 AM ^
Give the kid a reward for being a badass on special teams coverage. Brandon Smith is always flying around and making plays. They need to give him another number, though. Having two #4's is a little confusing.
In an alternate universe, Michigan will change to a 4-6 Bear to be able to stop the pounding up the middle this weekend. I guess that playing a running team when you're horrible at stopping long passes could be a good thing. I'm praying that we get a defense like the one that showed up against Minnesota last year. For that one game last year, they looked like hungry wolves out to destroy everything in their path.
November 13th, 2009 at 9:19 AM ^
with the Michigan D against Wisconsin last year?
November 13th, 2009 at 9:16 AM ^
this week (hopefully)!
November 13th, 2009 at 9:17 AM ^
has been his speed and coverage ability thus the move to LB. With Wisconsin being a power running team this is a perfect opportunity to get him in on D. Even if he plays well I wonder if he gets the same opportunity next week against the Buckeyes.
November 13th, 2009 at 9:24 AM ^
We all know that Tyrell Pryor isn't going to beat anybody with short accurate passes.
Ohio State offense is either a run play or some sort or a fifty yard bomb that exploits busted coverage or with expectation that the receiver will make a better play on the ball then the safety.
We don't need a safety who can make up wasted ground, we need a safety who's going to play smart, maintain deep coverage and not give up anything easy.
November 13th, 2009 at 9:27 AM ^
and not to disparage him, but I actually think the phrase "anybody but M. Williams" is applicable. Frankly, I haven't seen promise in really any facet from him to this point. Emilmen would surprise me, though, from no playing time to starting safety in a do or die scenario would be somewhat difficult. As to overall secondary, though Wolfolk himself looks more comfortable at corner, I think the defense overall was a little more stable with him playing safety. But with no Boo Boo, I beleive it would be Floyd or uh... at the other corner if they made that move. No easy answer, accept keep the defense off the field, which may partially explain the Denard option this weekend. Small chunks of yardage and clock control, but hold to the ball young man.
November 13th, 2009 at 9:43 AM ^
How many blue hairs are going to be wondering why the hell Minor is starting at safety?
November 13th, 2009 at 9:53 AM ^
That, and why is he wearing a wig.
November 13th, 2009 at 9:54 AM ^
The Big Ten Network crews that cover Michigan games is always getting that wrong. Every time Smith makes a tackle on special teams they say it's Minor, it's gets really funny really quickly.
November 13th, 2009 at 9:59 AM ^
I'm ready to play..today.
Look at me, I can be a safety.
- Brandon Smith
November 13th, 2009 at 2:17 PM ^
a brand-new hat, and brand-new pair of shoes;
You know I think it's time to give safety a try.
Just to take the field and fly around - a moment in cheese-land;
(bam) that wide-out’s down and you can kiss his ass goodbye!
November 13th, 2009 at 10:48 AM ^
told us anything its that it doesn't seem to matter who plays safety for Michigan because they immediately suck.
...see Stevie Brown.
November 13th, 2009 at 10:49 AM ^
The Fake Brandon Minor gets off the kick off coverage and into the defensive backfield. Me likey
November 13th, 2009 at 11:09 AM ^
I'd be really happy if Brandon Smith got the start. Me and my buddies played basketball at the CCRB last summer with some of the football guys and by far the most athletic person on the court was B Smith. I think some posters have alluded to this earlier but I think the mental aspects of the game might be what have limited his appearances to special teams because athletically, he's a beast.
November 13th, 2009 at 11:25 AM ^
that whoever it is, Angry Michigan Safety-Hating God has decided to take the week off.
November 13th, 2009 at 11:44 AM ^
hasn't needed to do anything b/c our safeties just aren't good football players. Angry Michigan Safety-Hating God did his work on the recruiting trail a few years back and is now on vacation for the foreseeable future.
November 13th, 2009 at 12:17 PM ^
It seems we have a fair number of decent free safeties/typical strong safeties (Williams, Kovacs, perhaps Smith). What we've been lacking for so long is that guy who can play the deep middle of the field. I'm still a proponent of moving Woolfolk back to SS, but we'll see how this goes...
November 13th, 2009 at 12:31 PM ^
Do you mean long term or this year? Who would you put at the other CB if it is this year?
JT Floyd and have him play off the LOS?
November 13th, 2009 at 12:39 PM ^
I would put Woolfolk at SS for the remainder of his career here. I think we have more help coming at cornerback than safety, and I think safeties should usually be upperclassmen, anyway.
I'd put Floyd at cornerback and yes, just play him in off man coverage, cover 3, or cover 2. I'd also try to roll the safety to his side whenever possible.
November 13th, 2009 at 1:10 PM ^
this is a sound strategy, especially versus Wisconsin, who does not have a great QB, Tolzien, is more of a running team, and relies on TEs quite a bit.
November 13th, 2009 at 1:22 PM ^
Seems like we are less likely to get burned for a long one with Woolfolk back at SS.
Yes, they could nickel and dime us all day with Floyd playing back at CB but that is some thing I am much more able to live with.
November 13th, 2009 at 12:59 PM ^
I hope we get an Uncle Rico like moment..."Coach woulda put me in we woulda been big ten champs...No doubt, No doubt in my mind"
Edit: I mean that in the sense that we would have finally found a compitent safety
November 13th, 2009 at 1:07 PM ^
Sorry. I have to start over with points though. Up vote me so I can post. Thanks guys.
November 13th, 2009 at 6:59 PM ^
What happened? Where is your old account?
Brian, give him his points back!
Eh, should've read further, n/m.
November 13th, 2009 at 1:11 PM ^
People talk about the lack of depth at CB going forward, but I'm equally concerned about S. I think Turner is a CB and will likely start across from Warren next year. That will free up Woolfolk to move back to safety where he is better suited. I'm still hoping Vlad can lock down the other spot next year. Something tells me Brandon Smith just isnt a true safety. He may have a bright future at LB, I just dont see him as a safety.
November 13th, 2009 at 1:30 PM ^
Where did you go? And how did you lose your account?