Michigan Offense Starting Projections.

Submitted by MichiganMan14 on

This is what I'm thinking.  At first glance, there is a ton of size and potential. Like many have pointed out it all comes back to the line.  Talent is absolutley not an issue with this team.

QB- Devin Gardner- 6ft4 216lbs  (5th yr Sr)

FB- S. Houma- 6ft 242lbs (Jr)

RB- Derrick Green- 5ft11 220lbs (So)

WR- Devin "Funchise" - 6ft 5 230lbs (Jr)

WR- Amarah Darboh- 6ft2 211lbs (Rsoph)

Slot- Freddy "Footwork" Canteen- 6ft1 176lbs (Fr)

TE- Jake Butt- 6ft6 250lbs (So)

 

Drumroll............

LT Erik Magnuson- 6ft6 294lbs (Rsoph)

RG- Kyle Kalis- 6ft5 298lbs (Rsoph)

C-  Graham Glasgow- 6ft6 311lbs (Rjr)

LG-  David Dawson- 6ft4 296lbs (Rfr)

RT-  Ben Braden- 6ft6 322lbs (Rsoph)

Average size= 6ft5+  304.2lbs

Average years in program for line/entire offense =  2 /1.8 

Average * rating for line/entire offense=  3.8 /3.91

 

Somebody tell me why we can't win the B1G with this line and this offense moreover.

Consider that we also have 5 Four star linemen in their 2nd and 3rd years in the program on the bench.......

This team will win 10+ games and there simply is not a mismatch on the schedule.

The defense looks even better than this ladies and gentlemen. 

Thoughts.....Critiques?

 

 

alum96

August 7th, 2014 at 8:42 AM ^

Braden is the 1 who worries me because as Brian has written - we had a horrid line last year and he couldnt' break through at any point to play guard.  I get that guard is not his natural position but it wasn't Magnuson's either and we had like 11 players try out on the OL and he was not 1.  This after he was given the LG position out of camp ...

You'd think in all the desperation last year they'd have tried Braden at some point...but they didn't.  And that is strange to me.  Further they put Glasgow out there at RT in spring as if to say (my assumption - no one else's) show us you are better than Braden. 

So he is a big question mark to me having never seen him play nor him having any game experience.  At least he is on the side Devin can see the rushers coming in but he is a major question mark - I don't know if he is the RT by default or if he would have earned it versus viable competition.  Basically it seems like Blake Bars would be his main competition or a converted guard... or our starting center. 

This is where Lindsay coming in would have been interesting - where they put Glasgow in that situation would tell us a lot.

 

aiglick

August 7th, 2014 at 10:01 AM ^

The interesting thing about Lindsay is he is a Senior or Redshirt Senior and does have the Alabama weight room and coaching experience. He's only started like four games. So as far as in game experience he doesn't have much more than our returners unless he came into a lot of games as a backup. I'm not sure he would have been our savior. Couldn't hurt probably to have another option on the line who has an interesting background at the premier program currently but again there are some doubt. Also, who's to say he would have mixed well with our current players since he would be a transfer. I think if the line even gets to average and as a result the offense is at least average (40-50 nationally ranked) I thin our defense has to be close to if not a top 10 unit given all the talent, experience, and coaching. Season coming up soon.

Space Coyote

August 7th, 2014 at 11:44 AM ^

And I think he showed great feet for a FR, and good understanding of technique for a FR, but he just doesn't yet possess the leg strength and drive ability at this level to slot in there to start IMO. Braden may not work out, but I think for sure that Cole should RS. From there, once he gets a year in the weight room, then he can translate everything into a very good college OL.

Space Coyote

August 7th, 2014 at 4:05 PM ^

My guess would be that one of the OGs would kick out to RT. You can get away a little more out there without having to be on an island in pass pro, so a guy like Dawson may be able to kick out. Obviously Glasgow could if they are comfortable with the other OC options as well.

Mr. Yost

August 7th, 2014 at 8:27 AM ^

...but the nicknames? REALLY?

LG and RG are out of order on your line...and Dawson isn't starting.

Right now Chesson has the 2nd WR spot, but I've been predicting for awhile that Darboh is going to shock some folks. No issues there.

Hannibal.

August 7th, 2014 at 8:43 AM ^

For the opener only

 

QB: Gardner

RB:  Smith?

LT: Magnusson

LG:  Bosch

C: Kugler

RG: Kalis

RT: Braden

TE: Heitzmann

WR: Funchess

WR: Chesson

Slot: Canteen

 

Hannibal.

August 7th, 2014 at 9:12 AM ^

It could happen, but I hope that you're wrong.  I think that Miller is a known commodity at this point and he is clearly not a Big Ten caliber O-lineman.  He might not even be a Div-IA caliber lineman.  If Kugler isn't clearly the better center at this point (having been considered college ready coming out of high school), then that bodes very unwell for his future.  This is a "Tate Forcier vs. Nick Sheridan" type contest to me. 

joegeo

August 7th, 2014 at 9:43 AM ^

First: I wouldn't' say we can't win the big 10. But a big reason this offense may have trouble is shown in one of your statistics: Average years in program for the offensive line: 2

A guy going into his 3rd year can be good enough to start, but these guys and their second year counterparts are being forced onto the field. Is it possible a bunch of 2nd and 3rd year highly touted o-lineman can get the job done? Sure. But we've seen how detrimental youth is on the oline (both on the field and through numerous stats shown on this blog). Even if they perform admirably, can they move the ball against MSU? They'll have to if they want the B10 title.

Second: Listing the average star rating for players who've been starting or out of high school for several years is silly. It's like taking the average draft pick number of starters on NFL teams. If I new absolutely nothing about the team, this kind of average coudl give me a general sense of 'upper tier' 'middle tier' or 'lower tier' team, but it's not going to tell us much else. Basically, it's a little annoying. We know we've recruited well for several years now, but let's not go to the 'look at our average star ratings, we're going to be great!' mode every summer.

 

KC Wolve

August 7th, 2014 at 10:35 AM ^

Seriously, we are still going with the youth argument for Oline? Still? Youth should have no bearing on the performance this year. Most of these guys have been here 3 years, yes, it is a new system, but getting off the ball and pushing the guy on front of you backwards or keeping the QB from getting mauled after 2 seconds should already be happening with the "Star power" on this line. Is experience good, yep, but the youth excuse is getting really tired.

Rant over

Mr Miggle

August 7th, 2014 at 11:09 AM ^

that's not correct. They've been here for 2 years and are starting their 3rd. The issue isn't just youth. It's the combination of youth and inexperience. This is the youngest and least experienced OL group here in many, many years, including 2008. Rather than considering that an excuse, use it to temper expectations.

KC Wolve

August 7th, 2014 at 11:33 AM ^

The Oline has been a tire fire for a while and I refuse to use youth as an excuse anymore. They aren't freshman, they have been here long enough to "get in the weight room" and lots of schools have young guys on the line performing. Youth may have been an issue 2-3 years ago, but it isn't anymore. It's just an excuse people are already giving to "temper expectations" for this year. This team has talent and depth and should compete/win this year. If not, all we will hear about next year is the lack of experience/youth at QB. No more excuses.

Go Blue

joegeo

August 7th, 2014 at 11:17 AM ^

It is a tired excuse. But 2 empty classes will do that to you. 

2 years ago... few 2nd and 3rd year guys (lack of depth)

last year... few 3rd or 4th year guys (depth + youth)

this year... few 4th and 5th year guys (youth)

The majority of guys haven't been here for 3 years by the way.

4 years: 0

3 years: 2

2 years: 4

1 year: 6

just starting: 2

Anyway, there's no excuse for a performance like last year's. However, the conclusion from OP is 'no reason we can't win a B10 title.' This is still a very young line, and just because it's been said before doesn't mean they should age more quickly.

If it makes you feel any better, I promise I will not use it as an excuse next year (and will only use it to excuse a little bit this year)!

Mr Miggle

August 7th, 2014 at 10:55 AM ^

play a lot of TE. Hopefully Butt has a productive season, but it's going to take a while to regain his form. A competent blocking TE will help the OL quite a bit.

superstringer

August 7th, 2014 at 10:55 AM ^

in 2016.

Assuming no defections to the league that pays on Sunday -- who knows, maybe in a year or two, B1G will be a league that pays on Saturday -- then that entire line will be 5th and 4th year guys with 3+ years of starting.  Unless some beast shows up who's even better.  It'll look... Wisconsinish.  Even, dare I say... Alabamaish (Alabamish?), and Nuss might have something to do with that.

As for 2014, wellllll... I have to see it to believe it, because based on what I saw last year, I'm not believing right now.

Wolverine Devotee

August 7th, 2014 at 11:08 AM ^

Week 1 projected starting lineup

QB- Gardner
RB- Smith/Green
FB- Kerridge
WR- Funchess
WR- Darboh
TE- Williams
LT- Magnuson
LG- Bosch
C- Miller
RG- Kalis
RT- Braden

  • Chesson as the 3rd receiver
  • Canteen & Bunting both see PT
  • Norfleet takes offensive snaps on some jet sweeps

uminks

August 7th, 2014 at 1:20 PM ^

the starting spot in summer camp then it will be a long season for the OL! Miller does not have the size or athleticism to play in the B1G.

reshp1

August 7th, 2014 at 1:38 PM ^

One of my secret worries is he plays against App St due to Glasgow's suspension and has a good game and starts the next week against ND. I think he has the strength and size to do well against App St, but I fear he'll get caved in repeatly against ND and the coaches will too slow to sub him out, costing us the game. I hate to be so down on one of our players, but he just hasn't shown really any signs of being good enough to play at this level.