Recent Comments

My take on the lower rankings is that he has excellent size and speed but that he will need good coaching and some time to be ready to see the field.  My suspicion is the higher rated safeties are more likely to play sooner.

I don't expect Hill to do much of anything on defense this year, but I'm very high on Hill's potential down the line.  I don't see how we won't end up with two very good safeties in a couple years since we only need two out of Hill, Thomas, Dawson, Wilson and Clark to pan out. 

This debate is ridiculous.  We were at 86 scholarships only if you count a suspended kicker who may be back and a 5th year that may not be renewed.  By the time we get to summer practice, we will probably be at 83 or less with regular attrition.  There was absolutely no reason for Ringer to be encourage to leave the team since there is/will be plenty of space.

Also, I thought Ringer played almost as well in the spring game as Bolden and Jenkins-stone.  There is no gaurantee that he would stay at the bottom of the depth chart for the next three years.

I can easily see a scenario where Hardaway comes back, and we run the offense through him.  I think Hardaway was unable to showcase his skills this year because Burke was so awesome, and the entire offense ran through him every play.  Hardway could be that guy next year (obviously not like Burke was).  With all the complimentary players around him, I can see his stock going way up as a huge part of the offense on a very good team.

I suppose you can make the case we could run the offense through Albrecht as a pure point guard or Walton could come in ready to be the focal point, but I like the idea of running the offense through Hardaway and give Albrecht and Walton a year of experience not having to be the primary focus.

Looked to me like two of the running plays were blown when TEs missed blocks.  One was Williams and one was Funchess.  From the Borges interviews, it's clearly a point of emphasis, but they've got some more work to do before fall.

1.  Fiction.  I think Drake will look ok, but I think Hoke is pushing for Rawls or Hayes to step up.  I'll guess it is Rawls.  Touissant, Geen or Smith will start in Fall.

3.  Fact.  I see Kalis and Braden as most likely, especially with Bryant weighing in at 325.  Hopefully now that he can move around a bit he'll get his weight down over the summer.  Burzynski would be my best bet to beat one of them out.

10.  Looked like Robinson was with the starters (at least Gordon) in the practice video and Wilson running with the 2nd team.  This surprised me as I expect Gordon/Wilson to start.  Only a snippet from one practice, but likely ahead of Thomas/Clark.  Will be fun to watch.

I see Schofield at tackle in all scenarios except where Magnuson is one of the top 5 OL.  I don't see Magnuson playing guard.  This might be the case if Bryant isn't back healthy and Braden is behind Magnuson.  In this scenario, I would expect:  Lewan, Kalis, Miller/Burzynski, Schofield, Magnuson. 

I think if Braden is one of the top 5 OL he'll play guard and Schofield will play OT.  His strength is run blocking.

I think people are underestimating Burzynski.  He was the first (and only) OL off the bench, and to me he looked ok when he played.  Won't be the powerhouse run blocker we'd like but will know what he's doing and block the right guy.  I see him as the option if the young guys and Bryant aren't ready. 

This being said, I expect Miller to start at center, and I don't see Miller and Burzynski both starting.  This makes center the most likely spot for Burzynski.

Line I'd like to see:  Lewan, Kalis, Miller, Bryant, Schofield

My count has us with 87 so far (with Poggi and Green). Depending on what's going on with Hagerup and the injured LBs, that seems like a reasonable number. Seems Hoke is expecting some attrition with the Smythe offer.

I'm expecting a late pick-up as well, but I'm not excited about losing a couple players off the roster even if it's inevitable.

As a 6th lineman, I like that he could play either guard spot or right tackle.  That flexibility should help him to get on the field down the road.

He's not the OL that I was expecting today, but it works for me.  I suppose it's a little bonus that we take one from Nebraska.

I think he'll be a tolerable back-up by next year. He was clearly frazzled early and hurt by the blitzing, not open receivers and dropped passes. After the mess, he looked decent on his last drive. He'll have another year of practice to get better. I do see an issue in that I see him more as a game manager than a playmaker. Given our lack of difference makers, we need a playmaker at qb in 2013. By 2014, the Oline is probably good enough he could hand off and make enough plays in the passing game in a pinch.

I'm with you on the O-line improving throughout the year.  I see us being about as good next year as this year with a better record and ending the year on a high note.  I see our O-line, DBs, LBs, D-line and WRs all playing some young guys and getting much, much better as the year goes on.

Like this year a toss-up on whether we go to the Big Ten championship game and great optimism heading into 2014.

No where in the article does he say he will start.  My guess is he was asked if Norfleet was going to play CB, and he said yes.  What's he supposed to say, "He's 5th on the depth chart, and if he has to play we're doomed". 

I highly doubt he's ahead of Richardson or Hollowell, but I can see where he'd play if we had to put in a 5th CB because of injury, someone being tired or some prevent defense with tons of dbs.

Norfleet was signed last year by Hoke.  At the time, I seem to recall it was primarily to be a kick returner.

My theory is this is a trial run to see if he can be a good corner which I assume the coaches think there is a decent shot.  If it doesn't work, they move him back to RB in the Spring or before Fall practice.  It's not like learning RB is that hard that he couldn't go back before Fall practice and be able to play (ok, blocking is kind of hard but that's unlikely to be his specialty anyway).

I think the odds are near zero that he's moving to CB if they didn't expect him to be at least 2nd string at one of the CB positions (nickel?).

Remember, Borges RBs at SD State were small. 

My guess is that either Dawson has pretty much decided he wants to go to U-M and will recommit prior to 12/14 or if he doesn't,  one of the other OL will commit on 12/14 and Dawson will be left out. 

I'd be surprised if Dawson takes the other visits in January and a spot is still left at that point. 

My take on the interception was the man covering Roundtree was watching Devin stare down Funchess and left his man. You see him start to follow Roundtree across and then leave and go get the pick. I'm not convinced it was a bad read, but a failure to look away from the primary receiver.

The option on 3rd and 7 would have been a sprint to the first down marker against the safeties if Schofield got out and made his block.  He didn't get to the LB in time so the play got smoked.

Comments from the Nebraska game was that Black had played an excellent game.  I see him playing SDE in running situations and NT in passing situations.

The emotion of Saturday's game has mostly passed, and I have a few thoughts.

1.  Those freaking out about Borges results seem to forget about him scoring slightly more points per game in 2011 than we did in 2010 plus last years Nebraska and OSU games.  Not saying he's perfect, but let's be fair.

2.  MSU conservatism was intentional since the plan seemed to be their offense is terrible and our D is quite good.  If we play conservative and don't turn the ball over, we can beat them 6-0.  Not saying I like this plan, but this plan isn't typical of the other 21 games Borges has called at Michigan. 

My read of the offense versus Nebraska was that Borges had started to open it up on the drive Denard got hurt and the offense was moving the ball well.  Let's not forget we scored 40+ against Purdue and Illinois.  If Denard can play, this offense can score points.

3.  The defense if much better than expected and quite good.  We should win our next three and Nebraska is at least 50/50 to lose to MSU or PSU.  I see winning our half of the conference coming down to whether or not we can beat OSU which is not all bad even if I'd say the odds are slightly less than 50/50 we win that game.

4.  Long term, I see a very productive offense with our awesome O-line classes, Shane Morris, Funchess, Darboh, Chesson plus Wyatt Shallman driving defenses nuts as a FB/h-back/TE.  2013 will be the transition year for the offense and won't be awesome, but hopefully the defense will be awesome enough to carry us through.

I agree one of the big issues is too many defenders in the box since teams would rather have Denard pass than run. 

The blocking issues that I have seen have been more due to one lineman not recognizing what the defense has done and blocking the wrong guy versus not being big and strong enough.  Many times if a lineman had picked the right guy of two to block it could have broken a big play.  I figure it's because Mealer and Barnum don't have that much game experience and have been hoping to see it improve as we go.  I didn't watch closely against MSU or Neb. 

I think Fitz has looked better as far as running North-South the last few games.

I agree that I think it will be Gardner next year (don't think medical redshirt is happening though).  I think if we had a powerhouse, OL and RBs plus elite WRs that Bellomy would start as we would need more of a game manager than a high-end playmaker.  However, I think we'll have a decent OL, decent RBs and decent WRs.  I think we need a playmaker at QB next year. 

I also believe Gardner will do fine once he gets consistent playing time.  I see a lot of his mistakes so far as trying to force plays that aren't there to make a play in his limited action.  I think this will settle down once he gets significant time at QB.

Our defense should be good enough to win games with either at QB, but I don't feel as good about next year's team as I do about this year's team and the team we'll have in 2014.

LBs don't leave after their sophomore year to go to the NFL.  I don't even think sophomores can go to the NFL if they want to.  I don't think you can leave until after your junior season.  Wait to worry until next year.  Hopefully by then Jenkins-Stone will look good enough that you can sleep at night.

The top 8 tacklers were LBs and DLs, so I'd say it's safe to say the LB and DL ruled the day.  The DBs probably covered pretty well, but Illinois didn't have much chance to throw.  On the rare opportunity they could have completed passes, the receivers dropped the ball.

It's amazing that it reached the point on the 2-3 plays to gain over 5 yards that I was surprised.

The D-line will be fine.  Sophmore Pipkins >= Campbell. Clark, Beyer, Washington will be a year better.  One of Black, Heitzman, Godin, Wormley will be fine at SDE.  The defense will be in the transition year from really good in 2013 to dominant in 2014.

O-line will be passable if Lewan comes back with Lewan-Kalis-Miller-Burzynski-Schofield with Bryant/Magnuson plus other redshirt freshmen as back-ups.  I think Burzynski is ready to play if needed.  He looked pretty good pulling in the play he get in against ND, and Hoke subbed only him in with the starters at the end of today's game.

I think overall the offense will struggle.  I think Bellomy would do well at QB if we had a really good line, RB and WRs, but we won't be quite there yet in 2013.  I am of the opinion we'll play Gardner at QB because we'll need his athleticism to make plays.  I think he'll do well at QB once he gets consistent playing time. 

My hunch on filling Kovacs position will either be Marvin Robinson if he is really good or that Thomas Gordon will slide over and Jarrod Wilson will take Gordon's spot.  Also, Dymonte Thomas is so good that I suspect he will play some even though it seems like we could get away with redshirting him.

I see the safeties as a definite strength.

At DT/SDE, someone from Godin (my guess), Wormley, Heitzman, Brink (?) or Ash (DT) will step up.  If it's Ash at DT, then Black will be our SDE.  If Washington, Pipkins, Black and Clark are our best 4, I think they'll start against running teams/downs.  Black will move inside against passing teams/downs with Ryan or Ojemudia or Beyer playing SDE.

I see our only weakness/non-strength next year as our second corner.  Blake Countess should be good at one corner (field or boundary) and Taylor/Jourdan Lewis/Richardson/Avery/Conley/Stribling will be ok but not great at the other CB.  By 2014, our CBs will be good to excellent.

Next year, I think our LBs and DL will be excellent against the run.  My concern is our DL won't generate a lot of pass rush and our CBs will be ok but not great and teams will make some gains passing against us.  In 2014, I think our defense will be excellent all around.

I see us being a notch better this year than we were last year.  My goal for the team is to win our half of the conference to earn a shot at playing in the Rose Bowl.  Anything beyond that is gravy, and I think the title game against Wisconsin will be a toss-up.  I still see this as realistic.  My plan is to enjoy every minute that Denard has left.

2013:  I see a small step back, due to the loss of Denard and the O-line depth.  The defense should be another notch better than 2012's improved defense.

2014:  Similar overall talent to 2012 but with the offense built to Borges' plan.  Defense is leading the way.  This is the start of our 3 or so years of steady improvement to national title contenders.

Not a shock after previous diet comments, but is anyone else concerned about Pipkins weighing in at 337? There's a lot of hope he can contribute this year, but that doesn't seem realistic at such a high weight.
Without the issues, I'd be excited by Frank Clark's weight, and I'm glad to see Chesson up to 183.

I don't see Bailey and Treadwell competing even though they are both WRs.  Bailey is a 5' 11" slot ninja and Treadwell is a 6' 3" outside WR.  It seems to me the remaining slots go to Treadwell and best available.  I believe after Treadwell the coaches would take any of the top players on the board at RB, WR, DB and DL, and they will save a slot for Treadwell.

My guess for the rest of the class is Treadwell, Bailey or Paul Harris, and the first to commit of a DB or DL (McQuay, Fuller or Mathis if they can get one of them).

I don't have any problem playing a harder schedule than MSU on average over the years.  We're better than they are!  Long term, we will field a superior program and won't have to worry that we play a harder schedule.  As long as we beat them it shouldn't matter.

OSU, Nebraska, Wisconsin and PSU have comparably difficult schedules which is good enough for me.

It seems to me that Ash/Washington are perfect complements to Black.  Ash/Washington likely won't provide much pass rush, but they seem suited to stuff the run.  Black should be disruptive against the pass, but might struggle against the run. 

I think with these guys and Clark/Beyer that Mattison will have a lot of fun working the matchups this year.

Sounds like there are logistics issues, but I wish it were later too. 

I live in Virginia, and I was going to take my 4 and 6 year old girls on their first visit to Michigan stadium for the spring game last year. 

Unfortunately, it was cold and wet so we spent the day with Grandma and Grandpa instead.

I don't think they are coming for the spring game. My recollection is they plan to visit but later, not at the spring game.

Fuller is the stud CB visiting for the spring game.

It sounded to me like the defense had "lost" whatever the competition it was.  It wasn't clear that it was Campbell specifically.  Could be either way based on Hoke's statement.

I agree that Michigan would still like a high end TE who can block and catch as evidence from the interest in Orndoff and the other TE.  Given the recruiting success, I am not convinced we are interested in any TEs that aren't both high end and can both block and catch.  I view the 3rd TE more as a best available spot at this point. I also think the coaches are reassessing things based on the amazing success they've had already.

If you add up all the positions they would like based on the publicly available info, there aren't enough slots for everyone.

16+

Ty Isaac

2 WR

1 TE

2 DL

1 LB

Best available from Cravens, Levenberry, others

That is at least 24 since Levenberry has us on the top of his list and has been told we'll wait for him.

My hunch is we'll take 2 more total WR+TE, but we'll see.  Smith's commitment (Yeah!) takes a spot away from somewhere since the coaches still want Isaac (good call).  We'll find out what positions as we go forward.

He's a 6' 2" CB who is a 3/4* recruit who in his highlight video plays the deep pass, plays the run, reads a QBs eyes for a pick, blitzes, blocks kicks and returns kick-offs plus the coaches are high on him in spite of our limited scholarships available.  I'll take him any day!

I'm sure there is still room for Cravens and/or Fuller if they want to come.

This takes one player off my wish list:

Elite RB

Elite WR

6’2” ¾* WR

DT

Everything else is a bonus. 

Trying to fix formatting. 

Got it.  Better now.

We have 16 seniors plus 2 open scholarships plus 1-2 non-renewals plus 2-3 of natural attrition puts us at 22 min, more likely 23+, by signing day by my count.
Most are saying we'll have less than 23, but I don't see how this is likely.

At this point, I can't believe there won't be two RBs we can't turn down that will sign up to run behind this line.  Wow!

I'm with you on Standifer. I'd love to add any corner that can play who is over 6' tall. It would be worthwhile even if they only substituted in to match another team's tall receiver.

Does your comment about needing a big time corner imply a lack of faith in Richardson? I'll always take more stud CB's, but long term Countess-Richardson seems like a good start especially with Avery, Taylor and Hollowell for depth.

I really enjoyed seeing this list and a lack of gaping holes.  Yes, we have a major need to sign a large number of offensive lineman, and it will be great when a couple of them are very highly regarded.  However, in theory we need them to backup the blue chips in front of them.  Yes, we need a blue chip RB which we will probably get, but it wouldn't be the end of the world if we had to settle for 2-3 pretty good backs.  An elite WR or two would be great in case the two we got this year don't become stars, and we need more depth throughout the roster.

This year our biggest need is to add elite playmakers wherever we can which is a great position to be in.

Obviously not all recruits pan out, but this class' multiple quality talent across all positions (except QB and one could argue RB) along with the last couple classes on defense has shaped up our roster quite nicely.

Go Blue!

Wasn't Sam Grant supposed to be visiting?

I see where we're good for next year, but after that it looks a bit light.  We'll only have a redshirt freshman (Stacey) and a redshirt sophmore (Miller). 

Am I correct that none of our other current lineman that will be around after next year are reasonable options to cover at center?

I agree completely. I think Woolfolk, Gordon and Kovacs will all play a lot in different situations. More Woolfolk in passing situations than in running situations. Hoke stated he liked Woolfolk having more catch-up speed than the other guys. He also said it was to get the best 11-12-13 players on the field. Clearly he thinks Woolfolk and Countess meet this criteria.

I see the biggest advantage putting Woolfolk at FS when they go Nickel and it lets Gordon play Nickel.

Agree passing offense must improve.  I love the option by Denard.  I doubt it will be used often, but we'll get several more big plays from it this year.

Love the DL play (Roh, Martin, Van Bergen plus Ryan rushing the passer).

I've decided not to worry so much about Brink potentially starting.  If this were just because Will Campbell wasn't ready to start, Black or Wilkins could be starting at SDE.  This means that Brink is ahead of Campbell, Black and Wilkins.  That makes me believe there is something good about Brink. 

I think it speaks to better depth at SDE than DT.  If Van Bergen plays DT (backed by Campbell/Heninger), that still leave Brink/Black and maybe Wilkens at DE.  Maybe Campbell is more a substitute than a starter at this point and Hoke prefers getting other SDEs on the field.  

That was my thought as well.  Didn't he play most of the spring game at SDE?  I thought that he and Roh were the ends in the spring game.

Other than Miller and Stacey, it seems like Bars is the only other OL who might be able to play center.  6-5, 275 doesn't seem too big for center.  No idea if he has the skills for it.

I'm hoping Hoke and company can find a stud guard/center for OL #6.  With all this recent attrition, maybe we go with OL #7.

Our OL recruiting seems odd if Pace truly has a serious enough knee injury to not be on the roster.  It seems like we would have gone after a center in this class or at least a guard who could play center. 

Of the guards or potential guards, I would think Posada, Bryant, Kalis would be rather large to play center.  That leaves Stacey and maybe Bars along with Miller as the only center options in 2013.

If Pace is out, seems like the last OL scholarship would need to go to someone who could play center. 

Kellen Jones is the player from this class I'm most excited about.  His playmaking ability in the highlight tape is amazing.

I do disagree with Brian about being on the 2 deep when he gets to campus.  I'm betting that Evans starts at WLB most of this year.  I also think that Jake Ryan is so good that he'll be on the field at either WLB or SLB and probably starting by the end of the year.

Next year, Ryan will be in an intense battle with Jones at WLB and/or Gordon at SLB. 

This surprised me as well.  It's hard to believe we wouldn't find space for Pipkins, O'Brien and Wormley. 

If so, the coaches must be pleased with what they've seen from Campbell, Washington and Ash. 

Aren't Barnum, Khoury and Schofield supposed to all be quite good?  Barnum will likely start at guard, but that leaves Khoury (guard or center) and Scholfield (tackle) as reasonable starters on the bench.  If we lose tow guards/centers or two tackles at the same time we'll be in some trouble.  However, we'd still have Pace at guard or center, and I believe either Barnum or Khoury played part of a game at tackle last year.  Not optimal, but not one of my top concerns. 

No brainer.  I'll take the Duke win. 

Football is more important than basketball, but you can't pass up a win over a #1 seed and Duke to boot in the tournament for possible wins later.

I'm with you.  It seems like every time I saw Johnson he was making a play/nice tackle.  He needs to be on the field, but unfortunately 3 of our better players on defense play basicly the same position in Johnson, C Gordon and Kovacs.  I don't believe that FS is the right position for Johnson.

The best I could come up with was to run a 4-2-5 with Vinopal at FS and Johnson-Kovacs-C Gordon as the other safeties.

Wouldn't we expect the RB/recruiting coordinator Hoke brought with him to be the WR coach now that Fred Jackson is back? 

I'm with you.  Hoke's first priority needed to be 'recruiting' all his current players to stay.  By making the current players priority number one over bringing in 'his players' also sends a strong message to the current players that they come first.

I'd be surprised if he also hasn't made contact with all the current commits by now.

While I was a student, I ran in to Desmond Howard in a Taco Bell and got his autograph.

No way to say that isn't a valid concern. 

However, you don't go from 4-8 to 12-1 without knowing something about coaching.  Whether it's at an elite level or not we'll have to wait and see.

I can't listen to a Michigan coach who sounds like Bo and not be all in for Brady Hoke.

4-0.  Mike Martin.  I'm on board now that he and Denard are staying.

I agree completely.

I see 2011 with 8-9 wins with a defense that isn't bad.

2012 = Big Ten Title

Given Denard's success in year 1 as a starter, how hard he works and how much he improved over his freshman year.  I believe Denard will be top 3 Heisman in 2011 and will win or finish 2nd for the Heisman in 2012.  

If you can run like Denard, you can be a good but not great passer and dominate college football even without the spread.  Look at Michael Vick at VA Tech, he threw a good deep ball but was a terrible passer less than 15 yards.    

Awesome!  They just showed Denard smiling and singing the 'Victors'.  What could be more beautiful?

I like this setup.  Depth is certainly a concern.  Van Bergen can sub some at DT and Black can play a good deal at end to keep Van Bergen fresh.

Why does everyone assume there is a lack of interest in the Michigan coaching job?  The only person that we can pretty reasonably assume turned us down is Harbaugh, and he took an NFL job for tons of money basicly where he lives.

There isn't anyone else we know of who turned us down.  Maybe some have.  It is also possible DB had several candidates he wanted to consider and that over the last 5 days he has spoken to several and is in the process of deciding finalizing which one to hire.

I'm trying hard to be patient until Wednesday.  After that I'll think about panicing with everyone else.

Any word on the date the recruits that were coming Jan 7 weekend were rescheduled to?  I saw they were being rescheduled, but would love to know the date for obvious reasons.  I think we'll have a coach by the middle of next week. 

As long as we do, recruiting shouldn't be very different than if we'd had a coach ready when RR got fired.

Pellini is definitely in the top 5 of defensive coaches.  He was the DC at Oklahoma when they were in the national championship hunt, then he left and they no longer are.  He was the DC at LSU when they were in the national championship hunt, then he left and they no longer are.  He went to Nebraska and cleaned up the mess that Callahan left behind.  Plus, he coached a young run first, throw second QB this year.

Seems like a great fit from a football perspective.

I don't mean get a draw.  A healthy Martin was definitely winning the battle at the beginning of the year.  RVB has been playing very well of late and could win his battles.  Roh can provide pressure, and I'd like to see Banks, Patterson or Washington in and holding their position.

A healthy Martin is a world of difference.

My Gator Bowl fantasy has Michigan coming out in a four man DL with Martin, Q Washington, RVB and Rog.  Q Wasington has learned all the D during the break and is not spectacular but holds his position and is immovable.  Martin, RVB and Roh dominate the OL and cause havoc in the backfield.  This throws their offense into disarray and makes the rest of the Michigan defense look much improved.

Good call on Smith and Shaw on releases behind blitzes.  That should work well. 

I'm looking forward to see what Rodriquez does against their blitzes.  Their defense is very different from how everyone we've played this year.

It seems this defense sets up for Denard roll-outs when passing and running if nobody is open.  Man coverage vs. Denard.  There's a reason we haven't seen it all year.

I'm hoping this is the game Denard scrambles some on passing downs instead of only on designed runs.   

I think the 3-3-5 works well against teams that spread the field like Indiana and Purdue.  Against teams that pound the football on the ground, we need more size on the field in a 4-3.  We need to use multiple defenses with the varied offenses of the Big Ten.

With more experience, we'll be in a better position to run multiple defenses well.

For next year, how about Woolfolk?  Also, further improved Van Bergen, and I'm hoping for a big jump from Roh with another offseason of Barwis and sticking on the line.

Best case is we have a dominant d-line with no injuries that can make the rest of our D look much better.  Need step up from Q Washington and/or Black.

I like the sound of that.  Any news about depth at FS is good news.  My concern on Robinson is whether or not he has the speed for FS.  Here's my take on the strengths of Robinson-Floyd-Vinopal for next year.

Robinson

Potential strength:  size/tackling  

Potential weaknesses:  speed, reading plays/experience (2nd yr at U-M, no FS experience)

Floyd:

Potential strengths:  speed, reading plays/experience (4th yr at U-M but little to no FS time)

Potential weekness:  tackling (with a little added 'good' weight size is ok, not sure on tackling)

Vinopal:

Potential strengths:  speed, reading plays/experience (2nd yr at U-M, experienced at FS)

Potential weekness:  size/tackling (Barwis will help some, but he will always be small for FS) 

My theory on preferring Floyd is that you can't teach speed, but you can teach tackling.  Downside is that he could also start at CB.  Not ideal, but if he doesn't win the starting FS job, he could go back to CB.

Hmmm.  I took a closer look at our CBs and safeties, and Taylor looks more like a corner if you only look at height, weight and 40 time.

The heights and weights come from the Spring '10 roster for anyone arriving earlier than this years true freshman.  All the 40 times and the heights and weights come from 'hello' posts except Taylor which is from Scout. 

Based on this, Floyd and Christian look like the best fits for a CB moving to free safety.  Crawford also has the size and speed if he's got the mentality.

He said at an earlier press conference that Ash, DL Talbott and Wilkins were looking good.  I sure hope he's right.

Now that we have lots of cornerbacks, a couple good options at LB, a good OL haul with likely Bryant to round it out and unfortunately not much left at FS and DT, what comes next?  Do we lower the bar some and add a FS and DT to fill the holes or hold out to 2012?