RichRod: Season Five
I think that most rational thinkers here would agree that RichRod's fifth season (where about half of his first full recruiting class will be seniors) will be his make or break season here at Michigan: here's a look at how that team might end up looking (or at least the upperclassmen of that team)...
*I'm going with the assumption that Grimes, Murphy, and Furman are all silent commits. I also think that we're going to get both Hankins and Parker, because Drake will not qualify.
QB: Forcier (Sr), Gardner (Jr/So), D. Robinson (Sr), Jones (Jr/So)
...It's going to be a three or four year starter here, should be a strength. D-Rob is probably an all-out Percy Harvin by this point. Conelius is probably somewhere else as well.
SB: Smith (Sr), Toussaint (Jr), White (Jr/So)
PB: Cox (Sr), Hopkins (Jr/So)
...Three great all-purpose backs, two solid powerbacks, this group should be a strength. Still though, if we can land Demetrius Hart, he'd be a game changer here.
WR: Stokes (Sr), Miller (Jr/So), J. Robinson (Jr/So)
WR: Gordon (Jr), Jackson (Jr/So), Williamson (Jr/So)
SR: Roundtree (Sr), T. Robinson (Sr), Drake!? (Jr/So)
SR: Gallon (Jr), Dileo (Jr/So)
TE: Moore (Sr)
...There's going to be a lot of talent here. No super-studs, but a lot of great players. If Jackson isn't going to be a TE, then we NEED to land one in this next class. Roundtree's going to be the leader of this group, inside or outside? - we shall see. There's going to be a TON of competition amongst the top five outside recievers.
LT: Lewan (Jr)
LG: Omameh (Sr), Khoury (Sr)
C: Barnum (Sr), Pace (Jr/So)
RG: Washington (Jr), Mealer (Sr)
RT: Schofield (Jr)
...Look at this athletic offensive line! Studs with the speed to get to the next level at each position. I can't wait to watch five seasoned rich rod recruits on the oline at once! For a sneak preview of how this is going to open up the running game, take a look at the 2008 Fiesta Bowl.
NT: Campbell (Sr), HANKINS!? (Jr/So)
DT: Ash (Jr/So), Talbott (Jr/So)
DE: LaLota (Jr), Wilkins (Jr/So), Murphy (Jr/So)
Q: Roh (Sr), Paskorz (Jr/So), Kinard (Jr/So)
...S.T.U.D.S., studs. This looks like one of USC's defensive lines. Big Will at NT, Ash at DT, LaLota or Wilkins at DE, Roh at Q, studs all-around. Depth looks like it should be there as well, but we might be in trouble if we can't land Hankins.
MLB: Bell (Jr), Demens (Sr)
WLB: Jones (Sr)
SLB: Hawthorne (Jr), Furman (Jr/So)
...This might be the most athletic group of LB's in Big Ten history, but the talent level isn't THAT high. If there was one area where we needed to land some STUDS in the next two classes, it would be here. Still though, it'll be interesting to see how these big barwis-ized safties develop as LB's.
FS: Robinson (Jr/So), Gordon (Jr), Johnson (Jr/So)
SS: Emilien (Sr), PARKER!? (Jr/So), Vinopal (Jr/So)
CB: Turner (Jr), Grimes (Jr/So), Jones (Sr), Avery (Jr/So), Brown (So/Fr)
CB: Christian (Jr/So), Floyd (Sr), Witty (Jr/So), Talbott (Jr/So)
...I repeat, S.T.U.D.S., studs. This looks like one of USC's secondaries. Robinson at FS, Emilien or Parker at SS, three stud corners in Turner, Christian, and Grimes. There's going to be a ton of depth here as well!
K: Gibbons (Jr)
P: Hagerup (Jr/So)
...Stud recruits at both positions, I guess we'll see.
IN CONCLUSION, I can't imagine that this team doesn't win the Big10 and goes to a big BCS bowl game. The start of Big10 domination, perhaps.
December 20th, 2009 at 5:04 PM ^
Must have totally missed seasons three and four. How'd we do?
December 20th, 2009 at 5:24 PM ^
So what is the make in "make or break" in 2010? I also agree that 2011 is the first team that will accurately reflect what RR wants to build at Michigan. I beleive that 8 wins in 2010 (including bowl), although not a great season will be just enough to keep the FREEP readers from picking up spears and going ZULU. 2011 with Tate a Jr and the Vest coming to Michigan is the breakout year. Considering the drastic change in personell and philosophy although the last 2 years have been painful now in hindsight also become understandable. Were in up to our waist with RR now if we swim back to shore to go across river with Harbaugh now 2011 becomes the rebuild and 2013 Harbaughs accurate reflection of what he wants to build. As long as we dont find that Craig Roh is driving an Escapade under the name of an Ed Martin relative we have to give RR 2011.
December 20th, 2009 at 5:44 PM ^
at Michigan?
Not me. Not my decision to make but if it were I sure wouldn't give RR 5 years. How many years did it take Saban at Bama? How many years you think it's gonna take Kelly at Notre Dame? Or for that matter, Tressel at tOSU?
I want a team that wins. Not a team that is pointed in the direction of winning.
December 21st, 2009 at 3:39 AM ^
You can take the slow, five-year rise to RR glory (he's a proven winner), or you can take seven years -- more likely it'll turn out to be 10 -- with whatever Saban character you feel like rolling the dice with. Are you so made at Rich Rod that you want to prolong this rebuilding process?
December 21st, 2009 at 12:03 PM ^
He's a big boy. This is a big boy league. He gets paid the big bucks. And the results have been shite. Pure 100% shite.
You keep talking about rebuilding. How long did it take Saban to rebuild? How long you think it will take Kelly to rebuild? Lloyd's worst year equaled RR's *two years* and the cupboard wasn't bare!
Stop being a believer in RR. Believe in results. Right now, results are shite. Putting up with 3 years more of shite is just foolish.
December 20th, 2009 at 7:45 PM ^
we'll need a real good LB coach for those Teensy Weensy Linebackers.
December 20th, 2009 at 10:19 PM ^
the linebackers scare me tons but this certainly looks like a solid team. however there are a number of big10 teams that have brought in good to great recruiting classes over the past two seasons, namely PSU (especially in the current recruiting class) and OSU, so i wouldnt declare us the big10 champions just yet. we should certainly compete, but i think the big10 in general will be pretty competitive.
December 20th, 2009 at 10:21 PM ^
The normal improvement associated with RR coached teams has traditionally come in year two. I think that has been pushed back a bit by high attrition, youth, and playing in a better conference. There is a higher level of execution needed to be successful in the Big Ten compared to other conferences that RR has made stops in. Just being fast and full of new schemes does not necessarily create big plays at this level. It will take a few years for the players to get comfortable and really have a grasp of the entire playbook. I think the next year will be the big jump that has normally been seen in the second year of RR teams.
December 20th, 2009 at 10:42 PM ^
i just dont see enough change in the defensive personnel next season to think that they will be substantially better. although if the offense can duplicate its progress from yr1 to yr 2, well be scoring 40+ points a game and the defense wont even matter
December 21st, 2009 at 5:55 AM ^
I've seen enough change in the defensive personnel to think they might very well be worse--as in Graham, Warren and Brown being gone. How does UM replace their talent and leadership?
And what manner of scoring 40+ does UM use? The quick strike RR's spread is known for (which still gives opposing offenses plenty of shots), or more of a TOP eater-upper that would enable UM to hide their defense on the sidelines?
I'm optimistic the offense can improve--but let's find a dependable threat at running back. Vincent Smith showed promise, but he has the ACL to recover from. Shaw? Hmmmmm Toussaint? Cox? Hello? *crickets*
December 21st, 2009 at 8:58 AM ^
RR will NEED to win at least 7 games in the regular season in 2010 to keep his job IMO. Personally, I doubt he does it, and we will have a new coach in 2011.
Btw, where did this "RR wins at ALL of his stops" meme come from? The guy has only been a HC at TWO schools before UM and one of them was Glenville St. which doesn't really count. Are people actually giving RR credit for the time he spent as OC at Tulane and Clemson? That would be the first time I can recall that an OC was given the credit for a team's success instead of, oh, I don't know, the HEAD COACH.