Angelique's (Det News) starting lineup
Angelique Chengelis from Detroit News predicts this lineup for the Fall. Since she seems to have a good relationship with the coaches, I assume there might be some inside information here. There are two minor surprises: Smith at RB and Hurst at DT.
QB Gardner
RB Smith
FB Kerridge
WR Funchess, Darboh, Canteen
TE Heitzman
OL Magnuson, Bosch, Glasgow, Kalis, Braden
DE Clark, Beyer
DT Henry, Hurst
LB Morgan, Ryan, Ross
DB Countess, Taylor, Wilson, Thomas, Peppers (Nickle)
April 13th, 2014 at 12:55 PM ^
What are you complaining about? App St. is the next game, isn't it? All she said is that she was looking ahead to it, not looking forward to it.
and while I do know the difference between "looking ahead to" and "looking forward to", I still feel neither.
I don't want to hijack this thread any further right now other than to say I'm seriously considering skipping the home opener for the first time in over 30 seasons; instead may just go and tailgate on the golf course all day.
April 13th, 2014 at 10:48 AM ^
PG Derrick Walton Jr.
SG Caris LeVert
SF Zak Irvin
PF Glenn Robinson III
F Mitch McGary
I think these guys will lead us to a B1G championship, and we should be a favorite to win it all.
April 13th, 2014 at 12:01 PM ^
I would like to see:
1. walton
2. Levert
3. GRIII
4. McGary
5. Donnell
or imagine three guards: walton, levert, GRIII
with two bigs McGary, Donell and Doyle
jdon
April 13th, 2014 at 12:13 PM ^
what is this a spelling test?
I was just trying to think outside of the box (and spell?)
jdon
April 13th, 2014 at 12:25 PM ^
You REALLY think McGary would play PF and Donnal would be play C?
lol.
you know, I do. well, I do think it is possible.
The way I see it McGary at the 4 and GRIII at the 3 is why they would stay (Especially GRII) and it might just create enough of a mismatch to have a 5 that is big, but young. Why not?
one thing I think this board suffers from is the echo chamber and repeating ad nauseum to a point where common, constant, thinking isn't challenged enough.
IF Donnal is performing so well, why not let him play 5 and McGary 4?
jdon
And McGary was basically the tournament MVP at the 5.
Just saying, those are pretty good reasons.
April 13th, 2014 at 10:57 AM ^
April 13th, 2014 at 11:11 AM ^
I agree. Lewis is the best CB we have on the roster right now and is also the best for the press coverage that Mattison wants now. I see Countess playing at Nickle a lot this season. Peppers will probably dig into Taylor's time at the other CB spot as the season goes on.
April 13th, 2014 at 11:20 AM ^
One spring practice? A Bowl game?
Just curious what makes you say that since Countess has played so much more than Lewis who hasn't played enough to even formulate an opinion.
April 13th, 2014 at 11:38 AM ^
April 13th, 2014 at 12:18 PM ^
Did I miss the game he started?
Go look at the spring game for 2013 and look at some of the starters - 2-3 of those guys barely saw the field once the season began.
I hope Lewis the man but this was a spring "practice" - reading much into who is starting or who is not is not going to get you far. Henry was on the 3rd team in the "practice" but from all accounts will be a starter when the real games begin, etc.
April 13th, 2014 at 12:28 PM ^
#1 It was the Spring Game...I supposed last year you thought Tom Strobel was a starting DL and Ryan Glasgow is this year.
#2 Countess was the starting Nickel, the 3 of them were on the field together much of the time. Countess moved to nickel LAST year a bunch of times when Stribling and Lewis came on.
April 13th, 2014 at 11:09 AM ^
SAM: RJS
MIKE: Ryan
WILL: Bolden
April 13th, 2014 at 11:36 AM ^
What has he shown to start over Ross who was getting blown up by HUGE OL all last year because the DL couldn't keep the OL from reaching the 2nd level with ease...
April 13th, 2014 at 11:13 AM ^
April 13th, 2014 at 12:46 PM ^
April 13th, 2014 at 11:18 AM ^
She seems to be confused about the LB changes. How could both Morgan and Ryan both start if they're both playing MLB?
April 13th, 2014 at 11:21 AM ^
SURPRISE!!!!!!!!!!!!!
April 13th, 2014 at 11:21 AM ^
You're confused.
Morgan is playing WLB, Ryan is playing MLB and Ross is playing SLB.
Bolden and Gedeon play WLB and MLB and RJS, McCray and Gant play SLB.
April 13th, 2014 at 11:28 AM ^
April 13th, 2014 at 12:30 PM ^
Again...copied and pasted.
I love how everyone is so selective in who they choose as a starter...
RJS is a starter because he started the spring game, but Ryan Glasgow is not.
How do we decide which Spring Game starters are "real" and which we dismiss?
April 13th, 2014 at 12:02 PM ^
Well that isn't how we lined up in the spring game, so, I'm confused.
April 13th, 2014 at 12:30 PM ^
I love how everyone is so selective in who they choose as a starter...
RJS is a starter because he started the spring game, but Ryan Glasgow is not.
How do we decide which Spring Game starters are "real" and which we dismiss?
April 13th, 2014 at 11:21 AM ^
April 13th, 2014 at 12:37 PM ^
Have you ever seen Darboh block?
No.
Have you even ever seen him play? Honest question.
Darboh was head and shoulders ahead of Chesson last year when the season began and he got hurt. He was the #2 guy behind Gallon. That is fact. Chesson was battling with Joe Reynolds to get PT (and he won).
She could easily be going off what she saw last year and thinking that Darboh has an entire summer/fall to get his spot back.
I'm not saying I agree, but you talk all big on here like it's a certainty. Meanwhile you have likely never even seen Amara play football.
that Darboh was going to be the starter last year behind Gallon. But the points he made are completely valid. Chesson did get much better as the season went on and by the end of the year he was pretty good. He also was the best blocker at the posistion and we know the coaches value that. Darboh has alot of work to do if he is going to win that spot back imo.
But he's acting like she's crazy for suggesting that it's even possible.
Like it's Chesson vs. Yeezus the message board poster for the starting WR spot opposite Funchess.
... yeah and you have a lot of facts (I am sure) that Darboh was "head and shoulders ahead of Chesson" pre-foot injury.
If Ben Braden suffered a season-ending injury in Fall camp last year you'd be bemoaning that one too. "OOOHHHH BEN BRADEN - SO MUCH BETTER THAN GLASGOW AND BOSCH"
Not only was it reported on this very site...it was something told specifically to me. So yes, I'm no expect, I'm no coach, I'm no genius...but I DO know what I'm talking about when it comes to that.
Again, I'm not saying Darboh will get the spot back, I'm saying you're crazy for acting like he has no shot.
Judging off your Ben Braden "joke" below...it is YOU that is believing all of the hype.
So it's YOU that thinks Braden was going to be the next Jake Long and Lewis is about to be Charles Woodson.
Good luck with that.
April 13th, 2014 at 11:22 AM ^
April 13th, 2014 at 11:38 AM ^
April 13th, 2014 at 12:32 PM ^
I agree on your positives, your negatives and your zero faith in the coaches. I also agree on 7-6 as a likely outcome given that blocking in general doesnt seem to be something we have the ability to execute.
I really liked the Nuss hire but I fear we've just created "Gerg - the sequel" as we've saddled him with the same support staff Borges had (just like Rich did with Robinson). When I look at Funk I see Hoke's version of Tony Gibson - a buddy who simply cannot coach but keeps his job cause he's the HC's long-time friend.
And just like Gibson brought down Rich and made Robinson look like a complete idiot (funny how he did NOT look so bad in Texas) I fear Funk will do the same to Hoke.
April 14th, 2014 at 12:09 AM ^
I dont think there is anyway he is keeping his job just because he is a longtime friend of Hoke.
Hoke loves UM too much to keep someone around who is damaging the program, resulting in the probable loss of his job. I honestly believe he will do anything necessary to stay here as long as possible, this is his dream job. No amount of friendship is going to keep anyone safe. Just my 2 cents.
April 13th, 2014 at 12:34 PM ^
Do you know how this is going to turn out?
It certainly may not work...but you can't know that now. Especially when you have 5-6 guys who are pretty damn good and it's one of our deepest positions on the entire team.
It could be just fine. We actually have a legit 2 deep for once, same with CB.
Your statement is like me saying "CB is going to struggle because Roy Manning is their position coach." Ugh, how would I know that? CB is as good as it's been since Leon Hall and Marlin Jackson were on the same team. How do I know that the move to put Manning there is going to be a negative. I don't, thus I would never say such foolishness in April.
April 13th, 2014 at 12:57 PM ^
Taking our (arguably) best defensive player out of a position that forced him to rush the QB (where he was VERY successful) and putting him into a position where he has to read/react is a Negative. I am sorry.
Speaking of Marlin Jackson - remember when they moved him to safety his junior year and he promptly had the worst season of his career?
You completely left that part out.
So now rather than Jake Ryan left out covering slot WR's he's in the action with two big guys in front of him (hopefully) keeping him "clean" by keeping the interior OL off him.
They're trying to put him in a BETTER position to succeed and do the things you're talking about.
Teams were just spreading us out and he was forced to play 8-10 yards off the LOS over a WR while they ran the ball down our throats.
How do you completely leave all of this out and assume the move is negative?
I can play that game too...
Remember when they moved Stevie Brown to LB and he had the BEST season of his career?
Remember when they moved Funchess to WR and was the most dominant WR in the league for 3-4 weeks before his own teammate took that crown back vs. IU?
Remember when Craig Roh to DL? Cam Gordon to LB? Dymonte Thomas to S? Heitzman to TE? Campbell to OL?
Position moves happen every year...sometimes they work, sometimes they don't.
This wasn't really even a position move, he's still a LB, they're changing the base defense to allow Ryan to be in the middle of the action vs. a step and a half late because the other team got an 8 yard head start.
April 13th, 2014 at 11:44 AM ^
April 13th, 2014 at 11:54 AM ^
Bazinga.
April 13th, 2014 at 12:22 PM ^
Bingo. It is as simple as that.
I am not even that concerned with the win loss this year (yes the losses will suck) but being competitive and seeing the team being MUCH better on Nov 1 than Sep 1. Young teams by definition should get better as they gain experience - not go backwards as the 2013 squad did. If this year's team does not make major steps by game 9 vs game 2, then it's not a case of "just a crap year without leadership" like they are making 2013 out to be.
We have a basketball staff where the players not only make strides year over year but within the year. If the football team cannot do the same, its the wrong staff. And hoping for major strides in 2015 if they make no strides within the season this year is going to be fairy dust.
April 13th, 2014 at 11:56 AM ^
Whatever it might be, this program has not had the best luck getting the most out of highly regarded RB prospects (Grady and now Green). Maybe we need to not take 5 star RBs with last names beginning in G.
April 13th, 2014 at 12:25 PM ^
April 13th, 2014 at 12:59 PM ^