Recent Comments

Elite 11 has a pretty consistent track record of being less than 50% right.  It's a great marketing machine Dilfer has put together, and proof that average NFL QBs can take advantage of getting their face on TV as analysts.

I, however, care only about one thing: how good will the kid be in college?  While Speight's motion might not look as pretty as some other guys', the college game has a long history of producing highly-effective QBs who don't look like pros when they arrive on campus (or ever in many cases).  Just to name a few:

• Johnny Manziel
• RG III
• Cam Newton
• Tim Tebow
• Braxton Miller
• Vince Young

Dilfer is penny-wise and pound foolish, often basing his rankings on silly NFL-level criticisms while ignoring a player's effectiveness.

/rant

Peppers is one of those people who is good at everything.  Crazy athlete, good rapper...he's the kind of person you have to take seriously when he says he wants to win the Heismann as a true freshman.

I think Andrew Brown is a longshot, and then I remember that Brady Hoke and Greg Mattison will be on campus when he arrives, and I believe we are in the mix.  Not so much with Tabor, and that's fine b/c Westphal and Peppers will wrap-up our CBs.

If we get Peppers, McDowell, and one more in the top 100 to go with our current class, we'll be in very, very good shape for this class.  If we get Hand and/or Brown, we are looking at yet another class that has to be considered among our best ever.

I love Denard and he was great to watch, but there is no way in hell I would say he evened things out.  We had two losing seasons, racked-up nearly a decade of consecutive losses to Ohio, and had the worst defenses in Michigan history.

Sorry, but the pain of the RR years > the glory of Denard.

Michigan/Elsewhere (IMHO):

2. Jabrill Peppers. ATH 95/5

4. Da'Shawn Hand. DE 45/55

55. Alex Bars. OL 0/100 (ND commit)

69. Malik McDowell. DL 70/30

75. Corey Holmes. WR 30/70

85. Artavis Scott. WR 45/55

87. Parker Westphal. CB 85/15

I believe we will get Peppers, Westphal, and McDowell.  I would be happy if we get one of the other guys, ecstatic if it's Hand.

But I'm glad we're playing them.  Screw public perception: I want to kick their asses.  Badly. 

Funny story, but probably good for MSU he's not going.

I wish the kid the best, but a college degree would probably do him good.  Or do him well.  Whichever it is, you grammar nazis.

The stats are strong in Gallon's favor, and I don't think there is a WR in the B1G that I would trade for him.  But let's be honest: we really only have a 5-game sample on which to base Gallon's talent.  His numbers last year were vastly inflated once DG took over as QB, and I'm not sure opponents ever started to fear Gallon enough to roll coverages his way or gameplan around him.

This year will be his first real test, and we'll see what it produces.  He'll be getting a lot more attention and will finally be in a pro style offense.  I believe he is a very good WR, but I don't know if I'd prefer him to Manningham or Avant.

I predict he has a 70-catch or so season, with 9 or 10 TDs, and between 1,050 and 1,150 receiving yards.  That would be an amazing season, and worthy of the #1 jersey.  It would be a top-10 performance by a Michigan WR.  

He will be our best WR by some distance, but I think his supporting cast will be stronger and he will be targeted by opposing defenses; this will keep him from having a monster sesaon, IMO.  More attention on him will mean more catches for Funchess, Darboh, Dileo, and Chesson.

I predict DG has the monster season, a top-5 in Michigan history for a QB.

Always sad to see a family member leave, but hope it's best for him. 

This is why computers will never take over the world: they have no common sense.  Using statistical models from the past five years flies in the face of the obvious.  Mattison has produced the #6 and #19 scoring defenses in the country the past two years, and there is absolutely no way we are any worse than we were in 2012...I mean, didn't 'Bama score half of those points against us?  There are only two positions on defense where you could argue we might be worse: SS and SLB...Everywhere else, we are better.

And DG was the highest-rated passer in the conference last season.  He tore apart the South Carolina defense.  On offense, we are more talented at EVERY position than we were last year.  Yes, we're younger, but every replacement is more talented.

Our youth might cost us a game or two, but we're far more talented than last year's 8-4 team, and have an easier schedule.

7-5 is a worst-case scenario that would have to involve an injury to DG.  With Mattison's defense and the talent we have on offense, Shane Morris could guide this team to seven wins.  Heck, Swieca or Cleary might be able to get seven wins with this team.

FBO is a great site with great ideas, but sometimes stats just don't line-up with reality.

He shows virtually all the tools you look for in an OL prospect.  He would be the most talented lineman in this class, IMO.  That's pretty good competition he's playing in TN too.  Would not be surprised to see him start at RG and then move to LT.  Dude can pull, and is a very, very good drive blocker.

...since the corner's read is going to drop him into Cover 4—perfect spot to intercept a ball to #2 but who's got #1 now? My guess is he just plays quarters with the linebacker (or in this case the SDE), who has responsibility for the flat. Also the SS is playing quarters so he's got his ears back.

This is simpler than you're making it (but still very difficult).  Just because the corner reads "Quarters" doesn't mean he goes deep.  Once he sees 2 go vertical, he's releasing that responsibility to the safety.  While he will probably continue his backpedal, he's now reading the 1.  When he sees the 1 break for his hitch, he can come down to cover that route and trust that the safety has taken the 2.

The effect of this is that his drop will initially discourage the TE (2) corner route but his eyes are on the 1.

That said, this is a very challenging play for the defense to defend if there is no pressure on the QB and the offense has a good TE(2).  Why?  Because the QB can wait for the CB to come down on the 1, and if the TE (2) is fast and big, he can get deep and wall off that safety to the corner.  Or, if the TE(2) runs great routes (like Gallon) he can double move the safety on a post-corner and get some open space.

This is definitely a route combination that Borges uses and should be effective with Funchess and Butt running that corner route and Gallon underneath on the hitch.

Schlabach's reasoing is simply that he believes Ohio has the best chance of getting to the NCG.  While I disagree and think that's a dumb way to rank teams, if he using the ranking as a projection for who will finish the season #1, then he's not wrong--just silly.

As for his Ohio love?  It's not completely unfounded.  Washington was the only player to beat Lewan for a sack last year.  They return the Heisman Trophy favorite at QB.  We'll see if their defense can hold up, but their schedule is favorable...until they come to AA.

I do believe #9 is just about right for Michigan.  We are still too young along the O-Line and too uncertain at RB to be any higher.  I think we are a fringe top-ten team, and depending on how well our youth shows we could be vying for the NC or losing the Legends division again.

It's great this young man just committed to the finest university and college football program in the country.  Do we really need a thread for this?

If he or his family are reading this blog, would they want to see this?  I'm not trying to tell anyone what to do, just saying this is a little sophomoric and not very welcoming to our newest commit.

It's one thing to throw a pun or two into a post...I don't think it needs its own thread.

#getoffmylawn

I wouldn't either.  Let's just make sure those good things happen against Ohio, and not U-M.

I believe York may be the most underrated prospect in the '13 class.  He is the Jason Avant of the group.  He runs very good routes, gets separation, and catches the ball.  He may never be the #1 WR, but he will be a consistent player who can bail out the QB and get us catches when we need them, IMO.

Jones is an exciting outside threat, but not nearly as polished as York.  I haven't seen much from Dukes other than being able to be decently fast and catch jump balls (which is still awesome) but I don't see either him or Jones display the ability to get separation like York does.

Mo!  So excited to have you in the family.  The real work begins now; NEVER STOP IMPROVING.

GO BLUE!

Based on GPA.  That doesn't mean much at all.  A Michigan degree says more than a 4.0 at second-tier academic institution.  To put it another way, no one says, "Sure you went to Harvard, but you only had a 2.6 GPA."

I agree.  But where do the minutes come from?  Here is our jammed line-up:

1. Albrecht/Walton - Switching the PG consistently isn't usually a great idea.  I expect Spike to hold the position because of his experience and ability, and Walton to share time on the floor and give Albrecht the occasional spell.
2. Stauskas/Irvin/LeVert - We have serious firepower and a lockdown defender...the situation and who's hot will dictate some of the minutes here, but I don't see LeVert consistently playing ahead of Stauskas and Irvin.
3. GRIII/Irvin/Levert/Stauskas - Our most loaded position.  GRIII is the best of this bunch...unless Irvin is better.  That said, LeVert and Stauskas are great options.
4. GRIII/Morgan/McGary/Horford - As I said in my own predictions post, I think GRIII will have to play some 4 because our best line-up has him on the floor with Stauskas and Irvin.  That said, the goal is to have two "real" bigs out there.  Morgan or Horford may start here.
5. McGary/Morgan/Horford - I think Mitch stays at the 5 because his offensive rebounding skills are so valuable.  Unless there are some serious changes to JB's offensive system (unlikely) we'll need McGary under the basket.

I think LeVert could be a very, very good player...but playing him means Stauskas, GRIII, and Irvin have to share minutes at the 2/3 with a fourth player...not sure it's likely unless we need the defense.

Basketball returns more sure bets than football does, but football has a great team returning and some talented young players.  I'd probably have to go with basketball, with the caveat that come March Madness, anything can happen (see tournament '12 and '13).

Ask me again after the ND game.  If our interior O-line can hold up against ND...well, let's just  say Kate will be dancing, muppetts will be singing, and Ohio will be crying.

Good work, Scarn.

Spence accumulated 106 Tkls, 14 TFLs, and 3 sacks in his senior season.  If Ross can produce like that this year, we will be in very good shape on defense.

While it's obviously a long shot, getting him here for a visit is always a good thing.  I like his highlights but actually agree that WR may be his best fit--he bounced every single run outside.  We don't need that from our RBs.

As RBs go, I'd prefer Mixon.

Anyone given a chance to play to the University of Michigan is probably pretty darn good.

Blaise looks like a pretty capable athlete, though not as quick or fast as you'd like for a college WR.  Perhaps he can put on some weight and become a U-Back type?  Sure, the odds are against him seeing much of the field during his Michigan career, but he is obviously a willing and aggressive blocker, has very good hands, and is a capable athlete.  I'm glad to have him.

Welcome to the family, Blaise. 

Go Blue!

• DG is going to have one of the best seasons in UM history (top 10).  He will get picked in the first round of the 2014 draft.  His throws are on the money, he has a great deep ball, and can fit the ball into small windows.  Oh...and he can run.  He is exactly what the NFL wants right now.
• Darboh and Chesson are weapons on the outside.  Gallon will be allowed to work the middle and play some slot.  Don't get me wrong--I still expect Gallon to be our leading WR and start on the outside--but those two RS Freshmen look good enough to let Gallon slide inside when go with 3 WR sets.
• Funchess will catch at least 30 balls and 6 TDs...did you see him work out of the backfield?  Borges is going to move him around and create mismatches.
• Kalis and Braden will be our starting OGs.  I think Glasgow has a slight edge over Miller at OC.
• The running game won't get better without better blocking.  None of our RBs looked that great; Drake Johnson looked the most consistent to me.  I'm hoping there were plays where there were actual running lanes, but it sure didn't look like there were many holes.
• The defense will be better than last year against the pass and the run.  Hollowell appears to be getting a lot of reps and made a GREAT play against Darboh.  Bolden is a back-up LB...and he would have been the best player on any of RR's defenses (except for Graham).
• The offense needs a RB, WR, and the interior O-line to step-up.  DG will be great.  Gallon and Funchess will be very good.  We just need one or two more passing threats and some great blocking or RB play.
• The defense looked very, very good.  When they got beat it was on amazing plays in tight windows, and they made some great plays against well-executed offense.

Get ready for a very different-looking UM football team in 2013...We will be back to "Big Brother" and I believe we'll do some serious thumping.  Barring anymore significant injuries, look for a maximum of three losses next season.

Oh, and I think JMFR will be back for Ohio.  Just sayin.

I think there's a real possibility that JMFR is back for the Ohio game.  Any sooner is a big bonus.

I believe that Devin will establish himself as one of the better (top 10) UM QB's of all time in the next two seasons, and it will be that much more amazing because he will do it without any big-time WRs.

He will not be drafted later than round two of the 2015 NFL draft.

I think you may be discounting the level of competition a bit too much.  Smith is a very good player who could be successful at Michigan, but Green is an elite prospect who put up huge numbers against very, very good defenses.  Green is faster and stronger.

I agree with Magnus that Smith's best asset is his mentality; I also believe this is the most important quality for a football player.  But Green also has a great mentality.

As far as vision goes, HS and D1 are very, very different games, and we'll have to wait and see who is better at finding the hole.  I'm not sure Smith is better in that department.

Nice touch and very good accuracy. Arm strength is still a question mark. But those receivers suck.

Your numbers are off; see my post below.  That said, I think you're close.  I'd guess about 25 passing TDs, 10 rushing TDs, 3,000 passing yards, 300 rushing yards, and 8 INTs.

Saban is now averaging 25 commits per class.  I believe we should expect attrition at a rate of 5 players per year at Michigan, which is pretty low for a top level program.  Transfers, academics, and kids doing stupid stuff should open up about 5 spots per year, making our average about 22.

I would expect that difference to drop a little.

While we compete in some head-to-head battles, recruits often have us in their top 5 and Ohio nowhere, and vice versa.  A loss to Urban this year certainly does not spell doom for our recruiting.  I seriously doubt it has much impact at all, especially if we only lose two or three games total.

2.  Any injury--real or imagined--can get you kicked off the team if you aren't very good.

I'm pretty sure that's an argument against using a 6'6" center.  Mealer was not great, and I'm just being nice.

Has everyone here forgotten that Tressel is subject to the show cause penalty?  Tressel has another couple of years that he is basically on lock-down by the NCAA, and if STAEE hired him they would bring his sanctions with him.

Does Dantonio hate Michigan enough to bring in Tressel in the hopes that he can beat Michigan again?  Maybe, but he'd be bringing sanctions, bad press, and would immediately become the assistant coach in everything but name.

This is not happening.

Go ahead and use my data freely; I don't have and don't want a website of my own.

How many guys have done this?

• Heisman
• College National Championship
• NFL MVP (or Defensive MVP)
• Super Bowl Champ

Can't be a big number...he will, of course, add NFL HOF to that list before too long.  My guess is that less than 10 guys have pulled this off.

EDIT: Did a quick look...is Woodson the only guy to pull this off?  He might be...

This is certainly OT, and certainly should NOT be filed under "Football"

You know all those silly websites titled "Fire[InsertCoachName].com"?

Can we have this one:

www.KeepRoushar.com

With this picture:

Never heard of that school.

Whether to up vote or down vote...gave it a pos when you snuck in the news about the kid. Congrats!

We are now talking about high school juniors.  Potentially 16-year-old kids, that may love the attention and everything that goes with it, but may not understand what it means or how it impacts the people around them.

Coach Hoke made a great point about the unintended consequences, pointing out that this means kids can be getting visits at their school from recruiters on a regular basis.  That could very well interrupt their academics, and would certainly be a strain on coaches and educators that have to set-up the meetings, and often supervise them.  HS coaches that are teaching classes would have a full/part time job as recruiting coordinators...yikes.

That said, the current rules don't make a lot of sense, and aren't enforceable.  They need to find some rules that restrict the contact recruiters can make (even if it's for certain time periods), and, I believe, add an early signing period.

Do you think Derrick Green and Taylor Lewan have enough talent to get us one more win?

I do.  And if you do, than a jump from 23 to 12 is about right.  If we're a 2-loss team instead of a 3-loss team, that equates to an 11-spot jump in the polls.

23 to 12 really isn't a big change.

I believe, based on the tweet below, that Cornwell had the opportunity to commit but didn't take it.  Speight jumped on it, and Cornwell lost his spot.  This is pure speculation, but I think Cornwell loved Michigan, and regrets wanting to take more time in the recruiting process (which I don't blame him for) to see what else was out there.

The BEST Lesson I can learn from this is, don't get caught up in the recruiting, find a coach and program you love and commit to them

— DC5 (@DavidCornwell5) February 6, 2013

Dawson is still in Ohio talking to Ohio people.  His mind will change once he's assimilated into the Michigan family.  I predict he's referring to tsio as Ohio the first time he's interviewed as a Michigan player.

The best part is the capitalized "DOES" and the lowercase "nt" with the apostrophe in the wrong spot.  This is pure gold.

I loved this kid's tape.  Yes, I think Cornwell looks like an almost ideal QB, but that's just from watching some highlights and reading Magnus' write-up.  Speight has the tools you want: great accuracy and touch, solid arm strength, decent athleticism, good pocket awareness, throws a great deep ball, and throws well on the run.  He also has room to grow.

For those of you questioning his arm strength, I'm wondering if you watched the entire reel.  At 4:51, 5:41, 5:53, 6:05 he makes some pretty hard throws.  It's not a frozen rope, but he has plenty of arm strength.

Honestly, he does remind me of Navarre in a lot of ways.  He looks more polished and less clumsy, but the slight hitch in the throwing motion and his height do remind me of Big John.

FWIW, I believe college QBs need accuracy and touch more than arm strength.  I'm very excited about this kid.

Welcome to the family, Wilton Speight.

GO BLUE

Kiffin's new digs are football-specific and far more impressive.

Someone jacked this kid's twitter account. Here's his latest post:

Khalil Is gay

— khaliel rodgers (@K_rodgers55) February 4, 2013

Dude is a bigtime playmaker.

We can all agree to leave bickering about the WSJ and NYT on the FNC and MSNBC message boards from now on.

The article is just another piece of evidence in what is sure to be a long and heated debate. I, for one, would let my kids play football or any other mainstream sport--including rugby, which is far more dangerous--knowing the risks. I think we are missing the point of life if we keep ourselves from doing anything risky. Climbing, skydiving, snowmobiling, etc are all more dangerous than football, and I don't think they should be off limits either. I understand and support those who don't want their kids to play football, just don't take it away from the rest of us.

But let's be realistic, the "eye" or inner/outer probably isn't happening.

If you look at the situation purely from the standpoint of what benefits Michigan the most, these divisions look pretty good.  We'd love to have Northwestern on our schedule to help with our Illinois pipeline, but we get more value out of recruiting the east, IMO.

Adding Rutgers and Maryland gives us a footprint on the east coast without sacrificing our midwestern heritage.  Are they the best, most tradition-laden opponents?  Of course not.  But they're going to screw-up conference tradition no matter which division they're in.

I have enjoyed our match-ups with Penn State more than Iowa, Minnesota, or Illinois.  They're a real team with real credentials and a strong history.  We should embrace that, and start to get more of their recruits while we're at it--there are some darn good players in PA.

And on the money side, adding the east coast pocket books can't hurt.  The Michigan brand would now be in the New York and DC markets; that is money in the bank for the conference and for Michigan.

The BIG downside, IMO, is losing the Chicago market, but we'll still be there for crossover games.

I am AGAINST protected crossovers, and the more I think about it, the less I care about having Sparty in our division.  Ohio is the real rival, and we should be building a rivalry with Penn State.  The MSU-Michigan game will never be a big deal outside of Michigan; battles with Ohio and Penn State have national appeal because each game features huge fan bases with strong tradition and historical success.

So yeah, I want the eye.  But I'd be happy with W/E, and I really don't care if we get Purdue or MSU...I guess I'd prefer Sparty for the fun of beating little brother, but I would also delight in seeing all of the energy sucked out of Dantonio if he lost the only game on his schedule he cares about.

As for competitive balance--as many have noted--that's likely to play itself out.  While the Michigan, Ohio, Penn State, and Nebraska names are the strongest and ideally are split 2/2, that probably means Ohio and Michigan are split as well.  So l'd rather embrace the challenge and opportunity created by the W/E alignment.

Quite frankly, the West division should be pissed...they lose big in this scenario, IMO.

I appreciate the idea.  Actually, it's not hard to find the data for the guys who leave.  But I'm not trying to measure our ability to evaluate talent, I'm trying to examine our ability to maximize the talent we bring in.  Part of that process is keeping your talent.

Michigan does not bring in many JUCOs or transfers, so when we see a guy leave, he's not often replaced by a similarly-talented player.  So guys we lose that become contributors elsewhere are still busts for us, even if they end-up being good elsewhere.

The Ryan Mallets and Justin Borens of the world are great players, but that doesn't help us win games.

I don't disagree with any of your criticisms about the structure of the data.  In fact, I looked at a four-tiered rating, but found that there were very few "middle" players (2's and 3's), and the ratings got even more muddled.

I also agree that I may have been a bit harsh on Campbell.  He may very well be a 2.  But remember that he only had 14 tackels in 2011, and wasn't on the field much.  As for Brown, Cissoko, and Borern--none of those guys made enough of an impact to earn a 2, IMO.  Cissoko played a lot but was terrible; Brown was inconsistent at best, and Boren left before he was really good.  You really earn a 2 by postiviely contributing to our win-loss record; I'm not sure any of those guys achieved that.

And Campbell's problem wasn't development or coaching, he was fat and lazy.  And Brown just wasn't good enough.  I see your argument, I just agree to disagree.

EDIT: Bumped Campbell to a "2".  

Talent is not the question here.  The issue is: how did these players impact the game?  Without a doubt, of the players you mention, Mouton had a greater impact on Michigan's record than the other guys.

You can make all sorts of points about circumstances, coaching, and the supporting cast, but there is no doubt--based on the stats and the eye test--that Mouton had a greater impact on our record than those other guys.

I know not everyone liked Mouton, but he was 2nd team All-B1G, put up amazing numbers, and sometimes seemed to be the only one playing defense during the GERG era.

Yes, and it's not even close.  Mouton's stats and honors:

124 solo; 140 ast; 264 tot; 18 tfl; 3.0 sk; 4 INT; 9 PD; 2 FF.  Jonas Mouton almost single-handedlly defended our opponents in 2010, racking-up 117 tackles with 8.5 for loss, 2.0 sacks, and two picks.  He made 13 tackles and a game-changing INT against Notre Dame, giving us a chance in another miracle win over the Irish.  He was one of 51 players on the Butkus watch list.  He led the conference in tackles, and was second team all-B1G.  Anyone who watched games in 2010 knows that without him, we have another losing season.  He had 5 double-digit tackle games in 2010, and 9 in his career.

Burgess' stats and honors:

80 solo; 49 ast; 129 tot; 10.5 tfl; 3.0 sk; 2 INT; 12 PD; 2 FF.  Burgess had double-digit tackles in only two games in his career, both in 2005.  He was an honorable mention All-B1G in 2005 and 2006, but never really an impact player.  His best season was his 81 tackle junior campaign.

You could argue that Burgess was an impact player; I would respectfully disagree.  But I don't see how anyone can argue that Mouton wasn't an impact player.  He was one of the best defenders in the conference and ranked 17th nationally in tackles his senior year.

Most fans and media lauded Dick Vermeil for his public displays of emotion, and by all accounts his players liked it. I think this is in that category.

Playing a Josh Groban song at a banquet seems quite different to me. Just sayin.

He reminds me of Barry Sanders and Eric Dickerson.

Up vote for Lebowski reference

Numbers aren't the only consideration.  I'm not saying London Fletcher doesn't deserve HOF consideration, but he has not impacted the game the same way Ray Lewis has.  

No, that's not my argument.  My argument is that a player's misdeeds that are unrelated to his football career should not keep him out of the HOF.  If Michael Vick had come back to the NFL, played at or near MVP level for 10 years and won three superbowls, he would deserve consideration for the Hall.

FACT: Ray Lewis is a HOF football player, and his football career is deserving of HOF recognition.

FACT: Ray Lewis has done some terrible things in his life.

I'm not saying Ray Lewis should get a free pass.  I'm not saying the guy is innocent or that he deserves your respect or admiration.  I'm not saying I would trust him, or that I want him as my friend.  I'm saying he's a Hall of Fame football player, and that's what the Hall of Fame is all about.  It's not an award for off-the-field character, nor should it be.  And if you look at some of the other guys that have gotten into the HOF, they are not exactly model citizens.

Obviously good-doing doesn't erase or undo the past, but Ray Lewis--by all appearances--has reformed himself and become a great team player, community member, and maybe even a role model.

The HOF is not (nor should it be) a referendum on a man's past.  If Ray Lewis had committed murder on the football field, done steroids, or some other "evil" that gave him an advantage or compromised the integrity of the game, I'd say his admission to the HOF might be questionable.  But off-the-field issues from more than a decade-and-a-half ago shouldn't keep someone out of the Hall, even if he did some really bad stuff.

But no matter what we think, he will be inducted, and almost certainly as a first ballot member.  He's one of the best LBs of all-time.

I'm not saying I want jackasses in the locker room.  I'm just saying that we're going to need some of those elite-talent skill players if we're going to be competing for the National Championship.

Just because a kid likes flashy football doesn't mean he's a bad person, and doesn't mean he can't grow out of it.  We need a few of these boys to see the light and come to Michigan, and it appears the staff is having a hard time convincing them.

I think Braylon Edwards fits this description.  As does Desmond Howard, and maybe even Charles Woodson.  Carr was able to recruit some of these uber-athletes in his day, and Hoke needs to find a way to relate to them.

It's clear that Michigan can recruit elite talent.  The O-line and defense have been stocked full of highly-rated players, with solid pick-ups at TE, and one potentially great RB seems poised to join the 2013 class.

That said, it may be that Hoke and company have a hard time relating to the "flashy" players on a very basic level.  This is just a theory, mind you, and there isn't enough evidence at this point to confirm it.

But look at the players that we've missed out on that seemed pretty high on Michigan: Isaac, Treadwell, McQuay, virtually every elite WR recruit.  This seems to point to a weakness for Hoke & Friends--can they relate to the guys that love the spotlight, the glamour, and the "flashiness" of college football?

Clearly, they've pulled-in some big time players who love attention.  But when it comes to Reggie Bush type players, the staff doesn't seem to do as well reeling them in.  I believe this may be just a fact we have to get comfortable with: Hoke isn't as good relating to kids that are the ultra-athletic slashers because their personalities don't seem to match.  This is NOT a knock on those kids, it's just an observation.

But Ty Issac said he committed to USC because "it's tailback U" and Treadwell seemd to cool on Michigan due to a lack of attention.  Selling discipline, tradition, and toughness simply might not play as well with guys whose game is more about skill and talent.

That said, I hope I'm wrong, and that we land an elite WR talent ASAP.

Best wishes to you, and welcome to the Blue.  See you at The Big House.

And I don't know what's not to like about this kid.  He's big, fast, and looks like he's got pretty good feet and hips.  He may not be a finished product yet, but how many freshmen are?

We're blessed to have him.  GO BLUE!

Inside runs are vital to any offense; those are the runs that open up the off tackle opportunities.  Your YPC avg. will almost always be higher on the outside, but if the defense knows that's where you're going, it's going to be tough sledding.

Inside runs are not designed to be home runs; they are designed to force your opposition to defend the middle of the field, thus opening the outside of the field where big plays can happen.

Even Chip Kelly admits his goal is to be able to run up the gut--it is the shortest path to yards (straight line) and forces the defense to adjust.

While statistical analysis says that you want more plays to reduce variance, this is an absolutely ridiculous argument when it comes to football.  You want your defense on the field for as few plays as possible, and a ball control offense helps with that.

Also, you want to play a style of football that minimizes the risks you take on each play, as turnovers and mistakes are often the reason for upsets.  'Bama does all that.

So bring up stats if you want to; as usual, academic theory fails to produce results in the real world.  You simply can't argue with 'Bama's success.

Will be much more exciting...even with Lewan and Schofield gone, we'll have 4 & 5 star talent exclusively on our two-deep, and easily have one of the best O-lines in the country for the foreseeable future.  Next year should be good, but it only gets better...

His highlight tape is pretty filthy.  I'm guessing that you're not that impressed because you're used to seeing Rawls and Hopkins run all over pathetic competition.  Don't get me wrong--I think Rawls' tape is very impressive, and I still believe he could be our starting RB next year...

...but Green breaks loads of tackles in the reel, and breaks off some long runs where he outruns safeties and corners.  And he's not playing low level talent--those kids are big, strong, fast kids he's up against.  Not every run is a TD, but when I compare his tape to Rawls, Green is better, and I'll give you some comparisons:

• Green does a great job of FINDING the hole and getting upfield through the path of least resistance. Rawls runs where the play tells him to go, breaks the tackle of a tiny LB, and then outruns a pathetic defense.  Green's vision seems far superior to Rawls, who spends most of his tape just running straight ahead.  Look at how often Green moves laterally, how we waits for his blocks, and how he finds seams in the defense.  Rawls just steams forward.
• Green does have very good speed.  Look at the play that's snapped at 1:11.  While it's not a TD, he takes a pitch and beats the defense to the outside.  Notice the safety that attacks down and ends-up behind Green...that was a bad angle, but that's a fast safety who is used to making plays with that speed.  Rawls is the fastest guy on the field every play...which, if you've seen him play in the NCAA, should raise red flags about his competition in his reel.
• Green's tackle-breaking is more subtle than Rawls.  Rather than pinballing (running into players and bouncing off or knocking them over) Green frequently makes subtle lateral movements so that tacklers are sliding off of him or missing arm tackles.  Again, Rawls pounded his HS competition, but that won't happen often in D1 football (unless you're playing Purdue).
• Green is MUCH bigger than Rawls.  Rawls is 5-10, Green is 6-2.  They have a similar build, but Green is more toned and more powerful.  And I think he's just as fast, if not faster.  Watch the snap at 2:00--again, Green outruns the entire defense to the sideline.
• Rawls tends to run towards the open space; Green is comfortable staying in tighter spaces.  This has proven true in Rawls' career at Michigan--he bounces outside too early because he sees green.  In HS, that equalled in TDs.  In the B1G, that equals 2 yard gains that should have been 4 yard gains.  Look at the snap at 2:58 on Green's tape.  That run is more impressive than many of his TD runs.  The blocking is okay but the safety fills the running lane well; Green cuts behind a block and turns it into a gain.

I could go on, but the point is that Green spent his HS career doing the things that college backs need to be able to do, and Rawls spent his HS career running and over and around lesser competition.  As a result, Rawls is having to learn to play the game a different way; Green will be able to play the same way and be successful.  Both have impressive physical tools.  Green is a more polished back that's played tougher competition.  Also, I wouldn't discount the intangibles--clearly Green is known as a hard-worker and leader (he was picked as Captain of his Army AA team) and I think that gets packed into his evaluation.

All that said, I think Green will need some good blocking to be a star, and he should get it at Michigan.  Ty Isaac, IMO, can create more yards without help, but isn't going to move the pile.

I can't get on board with that.  I'm older too, and I hope more realistic, but to say 9-3 is the best case is just getting downright stodgy.

The DG-led offense demonstrated serious potential, even with the worst interior O-line at Michigan in many, many years.  If our line gets to even average Michigan levels--and with Lewan back I think it will be even better than average--than our offense should be able to produce points.  Why:

• DG is an extremely efficient player.  He may lack consistent accuracy, but he excellent at scrambling for the first down and our 3rd down conversion rate with him at QB was amazing.
• Gallon should be All-B1G next year.
• Funchess should catch 30 balls next year, and is probably good for 8 TDs or so.
• Dileo is a reliable slot threat who was used well once DG took over at QB.
• Hayes and Rawls will have an off-season to battle for the starting RB job.  I do believe one of them will emerge as a solid option.  Both have talent and will get a steady diet of carries.  Adding Deveon Smith to the mix also encouraging; Derrick Green would be amazing.  My point is that I do NOT believe our RBs will have a terrible 2013
• Darboh and Chesson should contribute; Al Borges has a history of getting production out of his WRs no matter who they are.  Both these guys are talented and should produce something next year.
• DEFENSE.  I don't see many question marks.  You never return 11 starters.  Sure, we are losing 5, but only one of those players (Kovacs) is concerning, and there were NO other seniors on the two-deep.  If we can find an adequate replacement at safety--and I believe we can--our defense should be substantially upgraded.  Heitzman, Bolden/Ross, Countess, and even Jarrod Wilson are all athletically superior to the guys they replace, and BWC was really just a rotational player this year already.  Black, Henry, Godin, Pipkins, etc should have no trouble replacing him.  The Defense is likely to be better in 2013.

So what I'm saying is that a better defense and a much easier schedule might not be enough to get us to 12-0, but to say 9-3 is the ceiling after going 8-4 against a far tougher schedule is obnoxiously pessimistic.  I think 9-10 wins should be the expectation, with 11 a pleasant surprise and 8 a terrible mess.  12 wins is an outlier, IMO, but so is 8.

Against ND.

12-0 will be real, real tough.  Don't forget that our upperclassmen (the few that remain) are holdovers from the RR style.  This will be a very young team that I believe will stumble at least once in the regular season, as ND, Nebraska, NW, PSU, and Ohio could all be ranked teams when we play them.

That said, I feel a lot better about going to the B1G Championship game now...and perhaps it will be a rematch with Ohio.  I think we are looking at a 10 or 11 win regular season.

GO BLUE!

That would be in 2014.

I think this speaks volumes about our program.  Michigan football is special--special enough to wait another year to get millions of dollars and play at the highest level.

It's also a good reminder that when people are making decisions, you can never be sure.  I'm so excited for our season and much more hopeful that a B1G Championship is within reach now.  

GO BLUE!

I don't think there is much of a chance we burn Gedeon's redshirt.  These are our LBs going into next year:

• Antonio Poole
• Dan Liesman
• James Ross
• Mark Lawson
• Mike Jones
• Royce Jenkins-Stone
• Jake Ryan
• Desmond Morgan
• Joe Bolden
• Kaleb Ringer
• Cam Gordon

The ONLY guy on our current two-deep that departed is Demens; I believe that Poole, Ringer, RJS, or even Mike Jones could take his spot.  IF a freshman LB plays, I expect it's on special teams.

I'm just not sure having a lot of bodies equals having a game-changer.  I hope you're right, and there certainly is potential there, but there is little to no evidence that we are going to have a player at any position on the D-Line that can get consisent pass-rush pressure or TFLs.  We need that player to emerge.  I don't think it's an impossibility, but I just don't know whom it would be.  Again, my best guess is Ojemudia.

I love that we are arguing over which starting-caliber LB will win the job.  These are definitely Hoke Problems.

I happen to believe that Desmond Morgan is a very solid player who could be a great fit at MLB.  Bolden and Ross are undoubtedly more athletic, but speed does not equal success (ie Brandon Spikes).  I do believe there is a chance Morgan moves down the depth chart, but I also believe he is a very good player who could be a 2nd team all-conference LB that gets drafted in the middle rounds.  What this means is that we have FOUR very, very good LBs, and the beginning of a dominant depth chart on defense.  LB appears to be the first position to be loaded, especially when you consider that Mike McCray and Ben Gedeon join the squad next fall.

Kovacs and Denard are two of my favorite players in Michigan history.  That said, it's time for us to move on, and that's not a bad thing.  Just as I expect the offense will be more efficient with DG at the helm than it was with Denard, I do believe that Kovacs' replacement at safety will (eventually) be a better player.  Jordan's intangibles won't be replaced, but for our program to continue its upward swing we need to have better athleticism on the field.  While the 2013 secondary will be young and make the occasional bone-headed play, keep in mind that we're adding four solid 4* DB recruits in Jourdan Lewis, Dymonte Thomas, Ross Douglas, Delano Hill, and a sleeper 3* in Channig Stribling...and we may be adding one more.  Within a couple of years, we'll have a loaded depth chart in the defensive backfield as well.

The D-Line is another story.  I believe it's a bigger question mark than the secondary, largely because we MUST find a way to produce a pass rush, and I'm not sure we will.  Pipkins and Washington form a solid NT nucleus, but we still lack a great DT none of our DEs strike me as game-breakers.  I actually favor Ojemudia as the pass rush surprise, with Taco behind him.  I just don't see Beyer or Clark ever becoming elite in that regard.  Black looked like a pass rush terror at times, but I really hope he develops as a DT, because right now I think our best front four is: QWash, Black, Ojemudia, Heitzman, with Beyer in at WDE on running downs.  The good news is that we will have a glut of D-Line talent after adding Taco, Poggi, and Hurst this year, and still have Wormley, Godin, and Henry wearing redshirts.

Bottom line: I expect a very strong back seven, and more Hoke-Mattison-Montgomery magic on the D-Line, but for us to win the B1G, we need a star to emerge on the defensive front.

It's the same elbow the supposed staph infection was on; he was wearing a pad on it in the Minny game.  I wonder if that treatment contributed to the nerve damage, or had anything to do with it.

He left a few games with "numbness" in 2011.  I'm not exactly sure which ones, and too lazy to do the research now, but I remember seeing him flexing his hand and holding his arm.  Hoke was obviously familiar with the injury as well, and it was clear they had dealt with it.  I'm not positive how many games it had previously affected, but I'd love to know.

I don't like Kiffin. I don't much like USC. But I wish LM3 the best...just not his football team.

Getting small is a reference to turning your body in order to slip between blockers or slide off of blocks.  It is a difficult technique, and Poggi does it well.

I was impressed with Poggi, Dawson, and Kugler.  LTT has a long way to go.  Ira Denson was a beast.  Cameron Hunt also looked strong, and I would love it if we added him to the class.  He appears better than LTT.

Going back to Poggi for a second, you can tell he is a son-of-a-coach.  His technique is extraordinary for a HS kid, and I would expect him to start making an impact after a year of adding strength and weight.  In 2014, I think he will be in the rotation at DT or SDE.

Wait...what?

The interior O-line (Mealer and Barnum) could not block on running or passing plays, and I'm not sure how you can call our pass pro "very good."  Denard threw most of his picks under heavy pressure, DG dodged pressure for scrambles, and we ran sprint outs to avoid the inevitable up-the-gut pressure on about 50% of our pass plays once we went to pro style.  The blocking was very, very bad.

The trouble here is that this is not an opinion-based argument; the blocking was factually bad.  Ask coaches, scouts, grocery clerks or anyone who knows anything about football.  Our offensive line was offensive.

Denard's yards were mostly his, and even our own O-Line seemed to apologize after every game for their run-blocking.

This unit will be more talented next year, and will be better at run-blocking.  Pass pro will be an adventure for the young guys, but I seriously doubt that by mid-season it is any worse than this year's version.

We are going to be extremely young next year--without a doubt the youngest team in the upper echelon of college football.  We won't have experience + talent until 2014, and that's another year of tough scheduling...

A couple of items worth exploring:

• The attrition in recent years seems overwhelmingly focused on a few positions: RB, WR, and DB.  RB and WR are really no surprise--the skillset required by Hoke/Borges at these positions is vastly different from what RR desired.  But DB?  If you can cover and keep your assignments, you can play.  It seems that we managed to recruit a bunch of ding-dongs at this position.  From the '09 class, 5/6 DBs are gone, with Thomas Gordon being the only survivor.  From that same class, 2/3 RBs actually made it (Toussaint and Smith) and 1/2 WRs.
• 2010 is a different story...both RBs are gone (White and Hopkins), only 2/5 WRs stayed (Dileo and Jackson), and 5/7 DBs left.
• 2011 has 3/5 DBs contributing: Taylor, Countess, and Hollowell, with 2 leaving.  Both RBs are here (Rawls and Hayes) and should be solid contributors next year.  3/4 LBs made it, with Kellen Jones mysteriously disappearing (academics?).
• Using my crystal ball, here is who I think might not make it from the 2012 class: Ringer (injury), Gant, and Jeremy Clark.  That's two more DBs, which I think is one of the toughest positions to scout, because the mental part of the game is so important. But most of the other players from the 2012 class will be important contributors next season, making us VERY young (as noted).
• The 2013 class is loaded.  As good as 2012's haul was, it doesn't really compare to 2013.  I would expect 13-16 multi-year starters and at least 6 players to be drafted, with another 2-3 getting signed as free agents.  There are probably going to be 20!!! solid contributors from this class.  That is amazing.

I think attrition for 2012 and 2013 will be uncharacteristically low, and we'll go back to having a fair amount (6 per year or so) of attrition starting with the 2014 class, because playing time will be tougher to come by.  Of the 6 I expect we'll average, I'm guessing 2-3 of those are academics/team rules/quit football and 3-4 are playing time.

Congratulations to Delano on earning an offer to the greatest institution in the land. We are blessed to have you join this historic class.

What an amazing story.  Brock is a shining example of a Michigan Man, and I have to say I'm so grateful for Barwis too.  I wish the Mealers the best!

Any time a commit visits another school and talks positively about an offer, it's a good sign.  Think about our recruits that have talked positively about other schools...there are only a few, and they have ended-up decommitting.

I think that's the most likely candidate for the job.

Unfortunately, this won't happen.  Makes too much sense from every aspect save geography. This is important because the cost of travel for the schools in the less filling division would be astronomical.  Only way this happens is if the conference works out a deal to subsidize travel for the in the community division.

I hope that happens, but doubt it.

With the RR recruiting classes dwindling down to next-to-nothing, I don't think we'll see as much attrition in the future.  Instead of 7 per year, I would expect more like 3-5.  And while it's sad to see a member of the Michigan family go, it is a good problem to have when you are losing talented kids because they can't get enough playing time.  

Florida actually rushed for 89 yards, not 48.  Shockingly, 48 is the number of rushing ATTEMPTS by UF in that game.

It's worth pointing out that Florida only accumulated 183 yards in their victory over SCar.  This is a very, very good defense.  The only team that found consistent success on the ground was LSU, and they did it with a decidedly MANBALL strategy between the tackles.  That does not bode well for our offense, since most of our blocking between the tackles is...not good.

As for SCar's offense, they have accurate passers and better receivers that we've faced for most of the year.  If NW could move the ball through the air against us, believe that SCar can too.

I expect this game to be somewhat similar to last year's Sugar Bowl.  We will be overmatched, but we are good enough to pull out a win if we can get some turnovers and make some big plays.

This is going to be a very, very tough game for us.  While only Ohio and 'Bama were able to move the ball against us consistently this year, the Gamecock offense has been able to slice-up some pretty good defenses.  I don't think we hold them to 10 points.

I think we'll need to score 28 points to win this game, and I don't think our O-line is good enough to get us there.  If we can't create two turnovers on defense, we are in big trouble.

Our success this season was always going to be predicated on our ability to throw the football effectively.  The reason is simple: the O-line is not yet good enough to open holes for runners consistently.

Denard, unfortunately, didn't take the step forward as a passer that we hoped he would.  In the passing game, we were unable to protect as well as we needed to against top competition.

The bottom line is that without the credible threat of a passing game, we couldn't limit opponents to keeping fewer defenders in the box.  As it turns out, our passing game woes were largely because of two key factors: the O-line couldn't protect and Denard wasn't a very good throwing QB.

Once Devin came in, he had success as a passer, and the offense moved.  We still couldn't run effectively, and Devin was constantly under pressure, even against weaker opponents.

I am truly looking forward to improved O-line play next year and beyond...

I would like to have seen a few more calls with Devin and Denard on the field at the same time, but I do agree that if you can't establish the LOS, you're going to have a hard time winning.  If you turn the ball over four times, you're going to have a hard time winning.  These people that think play calling magically erases O-line issues just don't understand the game.  That said, some play-action with Denard would have been nice to see.

Despite our blunders, we were still in a position to win the game in the fourth quarter.  Could the play-calling have been better?  Yes.  Is it the reason we lost the game?  No.  Lots factors contributed to the loss:

• O-line play
• Defense allowing runs up the gut to close out the game
• Defense allowing 20 first half points
• Turnovers
• JT Floyd beat deep
• Cuts and lanes missed by runners
• Playcalling (yes, it could have been better)

And let's not forget that Ohio has a darn talented team, and frankly, just outplayed us.

I'm glad Conley is looking around if he's not sure.  If Michigan is the right place for him, he'll end-up coming back to us.  And if he can't come back because there is no room, it means we have some AMAZING players in his place.

I wish Conley and his family the best.

And we have a kicker/punter that is good enough to adequately replace both of them.

We will be an even younger team next year than we were this year, but we'll be ridiculously talented.  Unfortunately, that probably means we'll have moments of brilliance and moments of stupor...

Did you see the Iowa game?  They were using some dude they found on the street and he was gashing our pretty darn good defense.  Good blocking makes almost any RB good.  

Look at what the loss of Molk and Schofield (on the interior) did to Fitz's production...it's not like Fitz has gotten worse at football over the past year (I think...right?).

I would hope that we all learned something from last year's "lock" of Barnum being our 2012 center.

This coaching staff is not going to tip its hand about who the starter will be.  I think Miller will be the guy everyone says has the job; it really could end-up being almost any interior line player.

Is a cutback to the right; with that safety gone, everyone else on the right side is adequately blocked, and if Denard cuts back, that could easily be 6 points.  I know play design takes the ball the other way, but we need to be able to read that space and react.

The system isn't what matters.  The execution is what matters.  My question to the board is, what do you run when your O-line can't block?

Lewan had his worst game of the season, the interior O-line was exposed (again) against a very talented front, and I'm left wondering, what play can you call when your O-line can't block very well?  Sure, I wanted to see more of Devin and Denard on the field simultaneously (I'm really not sure why that didn't happen), but I'm not sure what they could have done that would have been much different without any blocking in the 2nd half.

BEAT Ohio