Defensive Tackle Numbers
When Danny O'Brien was quoted by Tom VH as being told that we will take only one interior guy I thought that might have been a pressure tactic, but over the past two days Sam Webb has voiced a firm opinion that we will take only one DT in this class. Take a look at the Depth Chart by Class and tell me what I am missing. By the time these recruits come to campus as true freshmen we will have at most five DT's on the roster and that will include Talbott who has injury issues and Rock whom we assume will grow into a 3 Tech. The only NT/One Tech players will be Ash (RS So.) and Q. Washington (RS Jr.). We all know that Wormley and/or Godin have the potential to grow into a 3 Tech, but that does not solve the depth problem inside. Given this scenario it seems obvious that we need both Pipkens and either O'Brien or another good interior DT, so IF the coaches are actually planning on taking only one it seems a bit strange. One possibility is that they are planning a new type of defense that is less dependent on big inside DT's.
INSERT: standard disclaimer that the coaches know what they are doing.
One possible good note on this is that Mattison and Hoke must like what they see from Q and Ash so far.
Am I missing something or did Magnus just employ gay as a slur?
Don't judge me just because I post pictures of male underwear models on my blog.
Watching Wormley's film, I just don't see a 3 tech tackle. Sheldon Day is a 3 tech, to give an example of what the ideal 3 tech looks like. Wormley seems to play better when his weight is down. In last year's film he looked to be carrying about 15 pounds too many. It is hard to tell how he will respond to our conditioning program, I just think he is too tall to play that position.
I don't think it has as much to do with his height as it does his skill set and body type. He's got long arms and isn't that thick in the lower body. He's a strongside end or, apparently, one of the coaches at Whitmer suggested he's an OT. But looking at this defensive line class (if you include Wormley), Godin and Strobel are much more likely to bump down to the 3-tech.
That is a much better way of wording what I am trying to say. Caught your break down of Bars, spot on. I noticed him being off balance coming out of his stance too, think that is why he catches at times, in order to reengage and then he drives his legs.
Thanks.
the players they're bringing in, but not sure how they fir the number of players they're bringing in either. NFL teams have more bodies in rotation at DTackleand OLine and they're limited to only 65(I believe) spots on a roster, Hoke has 85 scholarships and less depth in spots? Somebody will move.
First of all, this is my first post. Thanks for letting me participate. That being said, I'm going to jump right in to the discussion.
Let me just say that I'm in the "please take 2 DT's (O'Brien and Pipkins)" camp. But I have a theory that might explain why the coaching staff might think otherwise. I think when Hoke says we are going to run a 4-3, he just means that is our normal base defense. Of course that will have to change depending on the type of offense we are facing each week. If the team we face uses a spread offense (ala RR) a 3-4 or even a variation of the much hated 3-3-5 should be used as a counter. Therefore the need for more 3-tech types (Wormley, Grodin) as opposed to the big space-eaters mentioned above.
We used a 50 look in the spring game in nickel situations. I don't think there's any doubt that we'll see a 3-4 look at certain times, not just in nickel situations but with Roh/Black (and Martin moving around) dropping back into coverage on occasion.
No team in the country is 100% 4-3, 3-4, 3-3-5, 4-2-5, etc. Michigan was a 3-3-5 team last year, but we still used four-man fronts at times, even early in the year before the coaches realized that our version of the 3-3-5 was trash.
I'm hoping that Pipkins is a silent commit and O'Brien is bing told "only one more spot" because that would make two. Hoke has talked repeatedly about the imporance of the "guys up front" on both sides of the ball, so it's hard to square that plus 4-3 D with only one of the 2 being taken if they both want to commit.
I'm ok with just getting Pipkins. Dude is a grown man.
Also hope this means they like Washington and Ash. I have high hopes that Ash becomes a playmaker.
I agree with O'Brien when he says that U of M is only going to take one big ugly (300+ DL). As it stands, U of M is in good shape with DL's. Don't let current weights fool you. I went back and looked at all the DL's taken in the first round, what their orginal weight was and what their weight was when drafted. Very Different. Marcell Dareus was 277 in high school and finished at 319; JJ Watt was a 220 2-star recruit to CMU and finished at 290; Nick Fairly was 257 3-star OL and finished a 291 lb all-American DT. Corey Liuget was 260 lb and finished a 298 DT; Adrien Clayburn was 247 and finished 281; Muhammad Wilkerson was a 255 DE and a finished 315 DT. Finally, Cam Heyward was 264 and through numerous free cars and Tats, finished 294.
Granted all bodies are different and coaches can tell what kind of weight each person can add. But with these natural weight progressions in mind, certainly Strobel, Godin (now listed as a 270 lb DT), and Wormley (assuming he commits) can and will grow into decent size interior DL's. This also does not assume someone like an AJ Williams doesn't pull a Nick Fairly and move to the defensive side of the ball.
Michigan should have a dominant DL for many years to come.
Even Pharaoh Brown could end up being an RVB sized DL. He's listed as a SDE by Rivals and 6'6".
WOTS is he's up to 6'7" now.
Wowzers.
...Get a room you two. /s
If UM runs a 4-3, I believe you are less reliant on needing a massive space eater. Any kind of 3-4 be it 3-3-5, 4-3 under whatever really requires a dominant player in the interior. I know there was some discussion of Suh, but he is a freak of nature. The more typical run stopper is going to look like Grady Jackson. I'm just giving an example of an average NFL tackle. If you walk the NFL and 3-4 defenses, almost all of them have the "space eater" in the middle. There are exceptions, Fergusson and later Ratlif with the Pokes. Then again Dallas always had problems stopping the run out of their 3-4.
UM acquiring DT's is the most important position in my opinion. It is the hardest position to fill and you can never have enough of them. For every kid who grows into the postion there are ten who do not. So having at least one bowling ball per class is nice. Else you might run into the Weiszone. In my opinion his biggest failure was an absolute neglect in building depth at tackles. Without stumbling into Ian Willaims it could have been even more disasterous.
For a man who professes his love of fat butts, I am suprised by the plethora of tall defensive ends.