But has apparently really struggled in coverage (he was a HS LB). He just needs more time from a technique and consistency stand point before he can be trusted on the field as part of the defense.
spoiler alert: i linked this
But has apparently really struggled in coverage (he was a HS LB). He just needs more time from a technique and consistency stand point before he can be trusted on the field as part of the defense.
I asked the same question. Was told in essence that he's a safety and the position is too challenging for Freshman to play without disaster. I wondered if he could get a few plays in from time to time and was told no.
Hope that helps.
Furman is another guy (though he may play next year) who is a great athlete but is maybe just too big for safety but not really a linebacker. Stevie Brown's another one who didn't really find a home on D until year 4 (and that at OLB).
Wasn't he a HS RB too? Wouldn't mind seeing him or anybody else getting a shot there (D should be fine). Really not looking forward to having all of our eggs in the Derrick Green basket for the foreseeable future.
Duane Long thought he was the #1 RB and #1 S in Ohio for that year.
Thanks for the info. Also to MGrowOld's point, Cravens is starting at USC from day one. He's got three picks, FF, FR, and has looked like a beast. Probably had something to do with the struggles against ASU, but their D is #1 in the Pac12 in yardage and #2 in PPG allowed.
Leonard Williams had 8 sacks as a true freshman DT a year ago. They've had 4 receivers put up huge seasons in year one since Carroll got there (Williams, Jarrett, Woods, and Lee). We make excuses because we don't get those types of players.
It's not an excuse. Su'a Cravens is an incredible talent, but the reality is that safety is a very tough spot to play as a true frost. And Cravens is playing out of necessity, because he's had more big negative plays than big positive ones. And although USC's D has looked good (except against AU and ASU) they haven't played the three best teams in the league (maybe the only 3 good teams in the league).
Someone associated with our program basically said it is "impossible" (as in there is no way it could ever happen) to do without "disaster" (as in absolute and total calamity).
I would not describe "only if the player is really talented" as an impossibility. There are talented players that come out of high school every year. In fact, Taylor Mays also started as a true freshman at that same school in 2006. I would not define disaster as "a pretty good defense whose stellar stats 9 games into the season may be inflated by their schedule". Kicking our ass in the Rose Bowl (with a true freshman safety in 2006), that I would also not describe as a "disaster", at least for the Trojans.
Again, you've now mentioned two absolute unanimous 5-star players. And USC has had many of those who have seen far less success, too. Naming two incredible players really doesn't disprove the rule.
And I agree with you that starting a frosh at safety isn't certain doom. But it rarely works well, and it just doesn't make sense when you have two non-frosh who are playing relatively well.
I don't think Thomas should be playing or that we have a problem at safety right now.
Just pointing out the lack of logic and the 2nd rate attitude by people around and apparently inside the program. A team some people seem to think is a rival of ours kicked our teeth in with a true freshman safety, and we're saying that it's impossible to either get players that good or coach them that well. That is fucking depressing.
I am arguing that it is very difficult to start at safety as a true frosh, and that's not disproven just because those two mega-talents (one of whom is in the NFL now) were able to do it.
I also don't know that if Wilson or Gordon didn't exist or were injured that Dymonte Thomas wouldn't look about as good as either of those two, we just haven't needed to find out. I'm sure if we ever had garbage time we'd be able to see, but that just hasn't happened, and the coaches aren't going to throw in the unproven guy in a close game just because.
I don't disagree with anything you've written here. My issue was with the words "impossible" and "disaster" being used by someone close to the program to describe things that have in fact happened without disastrous results. At least twice (with the one other team I just happen to know anything about). Not saying it is common, or should be expected, just saying it is gross to hear folks in the program basically saying we're out of the being-as-good as-USC sweepstakes.
We're on the same page about everything else.
The only difference is he is playing and Thomas is not. Both were equally rated coming out of HS. To extol Cravens and Mays does a disservice to the OP who makes a good point. The fact that Stribling is seeing time on the other hand is germane.
I liked your back and forth here and cordiality.
I'm sorry, but Thomas is not as good as Cravens. If he was, he'd be playing. Mattison is not stupid.
Also, they were not equally rated. Cravens was the composite #1 Safety and Thomas was the #9. No one considered Thomas to be in Cravens class.
Cravens was a safety in HS. Thomas was a LB. Thomas has more of a learning curve, not just from a technical stand point, but also a feel for the position.
You are correct. I did not remember this right. I should google before relying on my failing memory.
"We make excuses because we don't get those types of players." We don't? UM has a better average recruiting rank than Oregon over the past 7 years. Let's get off the " we don't get the top notch players" meme. We get them. What we do with them - now that's a discussion point. Specific to Thomas I am surprised he has not played any nickel as the idea preseason was he would get time at nickel to warm him up for the transition to safety next year. Not be a starter, not be a stud, not be a Cravens.... but get 10-15 snaps a game to get his feet wet as a freshman at nickel. And then the same for Peppers in 2014 until he moves over to corner in 2015. Now Thomas will be starting next year with little experience. So what happened to this theory? Why can't the kid get on the field for 10 plays a game?
Recruiting is a two part process. Persuading guys to come to your school, and determining which guys will become good college football players. This staff seems to be good at the first and lousy at the second based on early returns.
USC didn't develop Cravens, Bush, White, Williams, Woods, Lee, Mays, Jarrett, Leonard Williams, Morgan Breslin, etc. to be awesome the second they arrived on campus. Or spend that much time with 2nd year guys like Wheeler and Tuerk on this year's o-line, or Baker and Kalil (2nd year guys in 2004). Fall camp and they were playing, and playing well. Or a year later on the o-line. The difference between the guys they signed when Coach O has been around, and the guys they signed when Carroll's son was running recruiting is also staggering, even though the rankings are very similar. It's the same reason Mark Dantonio is a fantastic head coach.
Could be, but 70% of the posts here from February to July focus on the recruiting dynasty we are building. p.s. I agree with your comments in general. So far the staff is excellent at looking Rivals.com and bringing in a good amount of those players. The jury is out if they have their own ranking system that is going to work and even then if they can mold those guys into top end players. Even the elite guys need some coaching...some.
What else to talk about between February and July (aside from the upcoming MBB National Championship, obvs.)
If I read your post correctly you're inferring that the staff is bringing in a lot of recruits highly rated by Rivals but that their selection of these highly rated recruits is suspect and that they should do a better job of coaching these recruits up, regardless.
Sort of puzzled...if the staff doesn't bring in highly rated players the blogosphere loses it and the "3 star mafia" emerges. Apparently now geting four star players is good but only if they are the right four star players.
I mean, srsly. Come on man.
The staff should not listen to the blogosphere (ps, I don't think they do). The athletic director should support his coach until his players are mature enough to see the field. Do you think Dantonio gives a shit that we're chuckling at how many more stars we've got every February? He probably knows, for instance, that LeVeon Bell > Kelly Baraka + Max Martin + Kevin Grady (to use names from the past and avoid hurt feelings), no matter what Rivals says, and he's just fine with it.
...Dantonio certainly offers the highly Rivals rated kids Michigan signs so I'm pretty sure for all the time he spends reflecting on LeVeon Bell MD is frustrated by those players who spurn his advances (see: Dawson, David; Bosch, Kyle; Kugler, Patrick; Thomas, Dymonte; Morris, Shane...hell, MD was in on offering Amara Darboh, Ondre Pipkins, Kyle Kalis. It's not like he wouldn't want the vast majority of your commits...
What I find interesting is MD offered neither of DeVeon Smith or Derrick Green (not that they would have been in the mix either way)...but still interesing.
Think you really forget about De'Veon Smith. He will surely be in the mix as long as he's on campus.
Those 7 carries for 12 yards and losing his spot from the travel roster really scream "definite contributor" to me.
You might be right but from last years recruiting season I was higher on Smith than Green. The travel roster thing screams discipline issues to me and not talent. Dude can play, hopefully it's here.
Brady Hoke confirmed(!) that Smith hadn't earned a spot on the travel roster last week. I don't get where people think a guy with 7 carries in a blowout game "can play." We've learned that high school film doesn't really mean that much at this level.
Because Hoke is the most truthful and forthcoming coach.
"Not earning" does not necessarily mean performance issue. As pointed out above he could have "not earned" because he failed to meet team rules.
One none of our rbs cept Fitz get to show if they r any good in the games and second with our line Adrian Peterson wouldn't do squat with our line. I think drake Johnson was gonna get a lot of pt of me didn't get hurt but if o were Hayes or Rawls I would b gone. Hayes was suppose to b a high 4 star and had good speed and we don't use him at all. I thought I heard justice was gonna b a slot we? When u have Jeremy Jackson starting n playing right there says we have problems he is slow can't jump he sorry but he sucks. Might know the offense but when he is put there its 11 on 10 .
For an unknown reason Deveon was left off of the travel squad to the MSU game. I hope this is nothing because I would like to see him get a chance to perform.
I am from DeVeons hometown and the rumors have swirled since the last semester of HS that hus grades are a problem..those rumors have resurfaced..as of now they are RUMORS
Yes he was a HB (played right down the road from where I live as a matter of fact) and one Hell of a good one too.
There are plenty of LB sized S playing in the NFL. As long as you have the athleticism, range, tackling skills and physicality to play S, you can play S regardless of size.
Kam Chancellor, starting SS, for the Seahawks is 6'3" and 230 lbs which is basically a LB size.
He is second on the depth chart at NB. If he comes in at NB, it is most likely going to be him blitzing.
Because you touch yourself at night.
Jarrod Wilson and Thomas Gordon have been pretty darn solid. It's not like safety is a major source of stress.
How bout Nickelback? Thomas was tabbed by Mattison as probably the starter at that position. Now he doesnt even play except for Special Teams.
That was before Countess was put in as a starter at NB.
Except that putting Countess at NB means putting Stribling or Lewis outside, which has been a disaster.
It's funny how we all sit around speculating whether it would be a disaster to try out a backup. We know that certain things, like playing our freshman CBs, are disasters already. So, it's certainty versus possibility.
I think Lewis has been fine. Stribling has been really good in coverage but, alas, occasionally phases out of existence.
Not disagreeing with you that the results have been disastrous, but these guys have been OK, and since Thomas hasn't played and I have no idea if he's any good, I don't know if that pecking order has been any sort of mistake.
They are an okay band but get made fun of quite a bit. I don't think they would be good at football.
I think Dymonte Thomas would add a lot to Nickleback, however.
They wouldn't. They're Canadian.
As far as a pass coverage nickel goes, Stribling and Lewis are probably better than Dymonte. They've made a few mistakes but it's hard not to say they've been in the right places so far. Thomas will be in contention for a safety spot almost for sure next year.
"Thomas will be in contention for a safety spot almost for sure next year." If so it would be nice to have a guy in contention for a safety spot not be so green - because then next year people will yell and throw bricks at their TV for Hoke not getting him any playing time this year, at nickel at least, when he makes typical mistakes of a guy who has almost never seen the field at the college level outside of special teams. As someone else said, Stribling and Lewis have found the field - I can guess we can debate is if its better to have those obvious mistakes at cornerback or safety, i.e. which leads to bigger plays but I think this whole discussion is interesting. This is a top 100 player who many said could end up being the best player in this class when all was said and done and many still are slotting as a starter next year but cannot sniff the field in any position outside special teams. Interesting.
I believe Mattison said in his press conference today that having expereinced players in the defensive backfield is the reason why we haven't seen Dymonte, and said that Thomas will be a great football player down the road.
I think this is why that, at least at certain positions, sometimes we as a community should temper our intepretations of camp hype sometimes. Mattison genuinely did seem impressed with Thomas, but I have to think that what he didn't perhaps reiterate - "he's a freshman" - is creating the false sense that there is disappointment with Thomas. Based on no data (due to lack of playing time), the reasonable conclusion is that he is a freshman.
Maybe this is just me, however. I think the ceiling is still high on Thomas though
so it's makes more sense to put Lewis on the outside with Countess at NB than to keep Countess outside and bring in Thomas at NB as previously thought?
Dawson and LTT are true freshmen, the fact that Kyle Bosch is playing is the exception not the rule for freshmen linemen. Terry Richardson on the other hand needs to spend time in the weight room or at a Burger King if he ever wants to see the field.
So your a flame-broiled guy, eh?
Terry Richardson is practically a midget. Odds are the most he'll do is ST coverage.
LTT and Dawson are going to RS.
Can Dymonte still RS even thoigh he played in the first few games?
This gets asked every single week
The general thought seems to be that he's a true freshman who is probably terrible in coverage
Dymonte : Defense :: Derrick Green : Offense
He's a freshman
Einhorn is a man?!?!
This is actually a great discussion. I'd argue it's the most dissapointing part of the defense this year. Had he been able to lock down that nickelback spot, we might have seen a lot fewer disasters with Countess on the outside instead of the young guys Stribling and Lewis being beaten on huge plays int he Penn State, Indiana, and MSU games.
But if we're going to be playing a true frosh in a passing situation, I'd rather it be one of the guys who are more accomplished pass defenders than a guy who is big and athletic but needs work on his pass defense. If the most disappointing part of the defense for you was the play of a true frosh, then you should have had different expectations.
but Thomas was touted for his blitzing ability and that wouldve helped us on obvious passing downs getting to the QB
We would have to blitz for that to be a reality.
I'm not saying that was my "expectation". But the hype was that Thomas was going to be a contributor/starter in nickel situations. The freshman in his place have struggled. I'm not trying to blame anyone, but their understandable struggles really hurt us in the Penn State game and at other times.
Everything else seems to be what I was expecting besides our less aggressive nature. Good, not great defense, which struggles to get pressure but is pretty solid.
Well considering two other freshman have played considerable time in the secondary(Lewis and Stribling) I don't think it's this made up preconception that Hoke only feels comfortable with upperclassman. Wilson is an underclassman too and has started every game. He probably just isn't that good YET. Like others have said, safety is a difficult position as a freshman.
Even a guy who is a fantastic athlete may have difficulty playing certain positions in college. If he's behind guys in his class, there's no reason to suspect they'll get better at a slower rate playing games than he will practicing.
Maybe they want more of a 3rd corner at that spot than it looked like in fall camp and he'll have more success at safety. But it is possible the guy ends up like Marvin Robinson and never finds a spot in the defense because other guys on the team are a better fit.
I really think it's the safety vs corner thing, because every guy we've used as the fifth DB all season has been a corner (Stribling, Lewis, Hollowell, Avery). That tells me that guy needs to be more of a pass defender than anything else.
And I don't agree with the Marvin Robinson comparison. In his case, he was too small for LB but too slow for safety. Thomas has plenty of athleticism, so that won't be an issue. I'm sure he just needs to get a better handle on the mental part that a safety needs and a corner doesn't.
I'm not down on the guy and have no reason to expect him not to play. Just pointing out that some guys who are super athletes don't have whatever it is to play certain positions or even find a spot. Could be physical fit for the job, could be mental, could be any combo or just bad luck with other more polished guys on the roster. Mentioned Furman and Stevie Brown in an earlier post as guys who took a while to find a home even though they are some of the best pure athletes in the country.
You're right that he could be in a Stevie Brown or Furman type situation, but I don't think we have anywhere near the evidence to suggest that yet. The more realistic explanation is that we just haven't needed him because the guys playing over him at older than him (or just better pass defenders, in the case of the nickel). We knew Furman was doomed when we had no safeties or poor safeties and he still wasn't getting a shot, even when he was no longer a frosh.
Next year will tell a lot about Dymonte. There will be an open starting safety spot, we'll see if he gets it. Though that still won't be the end all answer if it goes to a guy like Jeremy Clark (who is older) or Jabrill Peppers.
I actually thought Furman looked okay in the opener when Gordon was out and that his athletic ability showed up. Not quite sure where to go at times (understandable for a first start), but I wouldn't be surprised to see him win that job next year (especially if he can be the guy closer to the line of scrimmage paired with Wilson, something he couldn't do with Gordon or Kovacs).
Agree on Dymonte, I would just love to see more guys like him with top-flight athletic ability at RB. Thought Furman was a good candidate for that too, especially in RR's system where getting through a crease could often get you into the secondary without as much reading/reacting to the line involved. Would love to see Peppers start next season there too, especially with all the corners this year coming back.
"we just haven't needed him" If we didnt need him he should have been redshirted. If you want him to start next year or combat Jeremy Clark he should be getting 5-15 plays a game to get him ready. So either the coaches made an error burning his redshirt, he is not developing as they expected (which is on the coaches), or he is not what the recruiting rankings made him out to be. If the excuse of the safety position is so difficult to play hence he is not out there is valid (which I think it is difficult to play as a young guy) he should be getting those reps at nickel back. Not a ton or not against Indiana but if he cant see the field vs Minnesota or PSU or Uconn for even 5-10 plays how the heck is he going to be a starter next year?
p.s. if we were deep and did not except him to start next year this conversation would be moot... I'd be fine with him doing this and/or redshirting, having his "rotate in" system next year and then fight for the starting role in 2015 but since the depth issue is here, and we lose Gordon and have a gaping hole at safety next year, these questions become more pressing. I just dont see logic on not playing a presumed starter for 2014 at all in 2013 other than in special teams. And maybe its just we who have him as a presumed starter but who IS getting playing time this year who can slide into the safety spot next year next to Wilson? Avery is gone, Furman hasn't "shown", and that leaves Clark and Thomas - neither of which are getting reps.
I would think a logical outcome is any guy who is a presumed starter in 2014 should be getting reps at some level, in some games in 2013.
If you want to get a supposedly highly talented kid meangingful playing time—at the position he was recruited to play—as a pure freshman, great.
Burning the redshirts of guys like Will Campbell and Dymonte Thomas for ST duty and little else strikes me as counterintuitive and counterproductive. Obviously Campbell was RR's fuckup, but I think Hoke & Co. are repeating his mistake.
He is greatly needed on special teams. Otherwise we go through the whole "why are our starters playing special teams" argument that was such a hot topic last season. I would much rather have a talented freshman on special teams than a walk-on senior that may not perform as well.
When you have a serious uptick in talent more redshirts are bound to be burned. Great players want to see the field in any capacity possible. It is sometimes better to get a kid playing time and keep him around then it is to keep him on the sidelines questioning his decision for coming to play at a school.
Generally agree with your thoughts, but if there is an issue with him developing, it is not necessarily on the coaches.
In the first example of "the game plan was good! We got a 7 vs. 6!," it ignores the fact that IF THE ONLY guy the tight end can block is Lewan's man, it's effectively a 6 vs. 6. In that allignment, the tight end might as well be sitting on the bench - he isn't going to contribute much (Lewan isn't perfect, but that's still where help is needed the least).
A 6 vs. 6 should still buy more time than it did, but this is part of the reason it felt like 10 vs. 11 on the field sometimes.
This is because our coaches are really really bad. For some reason, Michigan football player development is on the third layer of inception where reasonable player development takes 4 years where it takes other schools 6 months.
Our safety play has been so damn miserable that these coaches must really be pieces of work if they can't get a stud athlete like Dymonte on the field by this point. I think there is an element of senior loyalty, which is insanely annoying.
You are crazy. Our safety play has been fine. Dymonte is a true freshman. It is rare that true freshmen ever play meaningful minutes.
Calm down BRO
He is a true freshman. What development do you expect? Talk about development of Juniors and Seniors (haha we don't have any! YAY) but not true freshman. Damn people... this is getting to be too much. Complaining about development of true freshmen... shit
Our safeties have been pretty decent this year by the way.
what are you talking about. Dymonte not playing = coaches bad! sooo then, I guess Dymonte playing = coaches good? Am I following that right?
also, apparently player development at Michigan takes 4 years, but 6 months at "other schools". What is this based on? What other schools specifically?
If senior loyalty was in effect wouldn't Joe Reynolds, Jeremy Jackson and Cam Gordon play more?
Are you suggesting Thomas should start ahead of senior safety Thomas Gordon or maybe senior CB/S Courtney Avery, because he is a stud athlete and they are non-stud athletes?
as others mentioned, safety play has been solid. might need to explain the "so damn miserable" comment.
I dont think anyone wants him starting or expect him to be starting from what I read in this thread. (In my world, a perfect outcome is redshirting 18 of your 25 freshman and the others getting relatively limited time but that is in a deep Alabama type situation) Many are confused why he has disappeared if they burned his redshirt. And why he is getting zero reps on the defense when many have penciled him in as a starter in 2014.
He had before the season If I remember right.
And it shows nothing for any injury to Patrick Kugler. My guess is he's just redshirting, adding muscle and learning how to whiff a block effectively. (blocking) /s
during/after his Sr. season. There was serious discussion on the board that as an EE he might have been the best option at center this year if not for the injury.
Avery took his spot as he came back from injury.
The best players don't always play..and that is a shame. It is telling when players become starters in the NFL but they could not get on the field in college. A talent like Furman, Thomas, Green would be on the field for most B10 teams. It is not like we are 'great' without them contributing.
What about green? Where has he been?
vs msu. Our coaches have upperclassmen love and I hate it, they don't play the best always.
You have to be able to trust your freshmen players.
# 3 safety that yr has started for Ole Miss in the big bad SEC and has made plays.
Dymonte was #4 (scout)
There is no valid excuse for your best athletes not seeing the field. In fact, if the best team in the land does it consistently, why can't we learn from that example?
If Alabama can play four running backs in a game, play freshmen regularly, then all of the reasons I am hearing here for not playing freshmen or stud athletes sounds like pure dumb shit.
Ever heard that one? Tired of hearing this. Rack had a great point on BTN tonight about how all these other schools also lost starting lineman and you don't see them getting their asses handed to them and blowing assignments everywhere. Points right to coaching.
Our coaches have to stop being afraid of freshmen mistakes. If a senior has more experience but could never match the youngster's pure ability, you have to give the nod to ability if you want to maximize your talent and team ceiling. Why on earth would you hold your own team back?
What about Taco Charlton ???? We already can't pressure the quarterback. Why not ?
Well he's a true frosh that from the sounds of it just did well solely on athletic ability in high school. He doesn't have the mental game yet. Can't read offenses just shoots up field. He's too raw basically. At best he's a good fit for very obvious passing downs that's all. Also early on he had trouble with pad level. He's just not really a viable option yet that's all
Safety is not out issue . It's our weak pass rush. We leave the secondary out to dry . Where is taco Charlton ???? Anybody know why he hasn't played ? He'll he can't do worse !!!!
This is another instance where the team's performance in the Akron and Connecticut games may end hurting us. I had expected those games to be blowouts and that reserves like Thomas would have the opportunity for significant playing time in the second half.
I think it's just difficult for freshmen to come in and play safety without the fear of "the big play." OSU has Vonn Bell, who is certainly highly touted coming out of signing day and fall camp, but he has hardly seen the field in meaningful moments outside of special teams, despite a season-ending injury to safety Christian Bryant. I don't think it's at all an indication of how the OSU staff feels about Bell (they're obviously excited about his future), but rather he needs to learn the position and its role in our defense before the coaches trust sending him out there.
I don't know if it's the same situation with Dymonte, but given his outstanding athleticism I would imagine the coaches are thrilled to have him.