Do you want to recruit Dee or D more?
There is a lot of breathless anticipation at a potential Dee Hart commitment next week. This is all well and good. I hope Dee comes too. But I have to say, if I was forced to choose, I would rather have another 4 star LB or CB over Dee. Or another stud OT or DT. We're already doing well on offense, and between Shaw, Toussaint and the rest, will be ok with the RB position. Yes, Dee Hart could well improve things. But if our defense becomes dominant, he won't matter so much. If our defense is still porous, he also won't matter so much.
Hopefully, this isn't a choice that has to be made. We get Dee to commit, and plent of solid "D" commits as well.
September 28th, 2010 at 11:02 AM ^
When did the OP say that anyone had to choose? A bunch of people in this thread are like "You're dumb we don't have to choose this isn't either/or like the NFL draft blah blah blah."
The OP is simply saying that he thinks defensive recruits are more important than a running back recruit. I don't know why you're jumping all over him.
September 28th, 2010 at 11:10 AM ^
He didn't present a workable hypo. Or, at the very least, he sort of presented one ("if I had to choose one or the other I want D"), then negates it with "well, we don't have to choose - we can have both."
Predictably, people are pointing out that the last sentence is what matters. Getting one guy doesn't keep us from getting all the others. Also, the "one spot left" hypo doesn't work at all because Dee is enrolling early, long before anyone's class would fill up.
September 28th, 2010 at 12:13 PM ^
OP just wanted to start a conversation about the football team. This being a Michigan football blog, that seems okay to me...It's not as if OP logged onto an MIT website designed to discuss physics and said, "Let's imagine that my Honda can drive faster than the speed of light..."
September 28th, 2010 at 11:08 AM ^
As much as I would like some big time D prospects this year I think next year will be the BIG haul when it comes to high profile defensive recuits. I think with a good year this year and a bowl win we land Jenkins-Stone, James Ross, Terry Richardson, Danny O'Brien, Godin and possibly Gant and Wormley. LB's check, DL check, DB's check
September 28th, 2010 at 11:19 AM ^
and oh yeah a Ferrari if you don't mind
September 28th, 2010 at 11:19 AM ^
Last year was our "need to stock up on defense" season and we did just that. We have 17 freshmen who play on defense (10 in the secondary), a bunch of whom have already seen significant playing time. You need to recruit every position every year, but from a numbers standpoint we are pretty close to 50/50 right now. Our D is much more likely to improve as this talented group of freshmen gain experience than by adding more young players next year.
So yeah, keep recruiting defense, but I'd take a blue-chip back over pure numbers on the other side of the ball at this point. That being said, a couple more linebacker prospects would be nice since that is maybe the one position on the field where we're still a little thin (though that may change as guys like Furman and M. Robinson continue to grow).
September 28th, 2010 at 11:24 AM ^
He's going to commit next week. Focus on him, then shift gears. Yeah, we need defensive players, but when you have an opportunity at a star like Hart, you take it.
September 28th, 2010 at 1:25 PM ^
The more improvement we show on one side of the ball, the easier it will be to recruit the other. What LB/CB/etc. wouldn't want to play with Dilithium handling the other side of the ball?
September 28th, 2010 at 4:10 PM ^
Exactly. I was having trouble trying to convince another MIchigan fan that Denard might be our best recruiter right now. We're all over the TV and he makes us a legit threat over the next few years.
September 28th, 2010 at 11:34 AM ^
Are Dee and the D mutually exclusive? They're both going to be part of Michigan's recruiting efforts. I don't see why this is even being discussed. We're recruiting Dee Hart. We're recruiting defense. Favoring one over the other seems like a senseless exercise.
Guys, should I drink milk in the morning OR drink water? Do both, you numbskull.
(EDIT: And of course, the original question is already heavily slanted. Gee, do I want one player at a position of moderate need or a broad, vagua sweeping generalization about our needs all over the defense? DURRR )
September 28th, 2010 at 11:47 AM ^
We want Hart. And I trust he's committing next week. My point:
- I assume our major recruiting focus is on defense, because that is our major liability.
- If resources, in terms of recruiting time, not scholarships, are limited, focus on defense.
- Dee Hart will NOT, in the next two years, have as great a positive influence on the team as a stud LB (or DB, for that matter.)
- If there were any 4 - 5 star potential LB or DB recruits enrolling early, that is where I would put all my chips right now.
September 28th, 2010 at 11:50 AM ^
September 28th, 2010 at 11:58 AM ^
I wonder if you will all of a sudden see offers this week to a couple of Dee's teammates, who are IMO worthy of one, LB Daryl Monroe especially, and Safety prospect Roderick Ryles. I believe Monroe would have generated more buzz, if he didn't verbal to Washington State so early.He has some pretty nice film floating out there on the internets. Why a kid from Orlando would verbal to WSU so early is the game seems strange. I also think Ryles is a pretty solid player, but don't think I would take him at the expense of Avery Walls, if it became a numbers game. They also have a pretty good kicker at DR. P, but I would be hesitant of giving another kicker a 4 year scholarship. We need to fix that the kicking ASAP, but I think I would be inclined to scour the soccer clubs first considering all the holes that we have elsewhere.
September 28th, 2010 at 12:17 PM ^
I would take Kris Frost (assuming he eventually plays LB) over Hart if I had to choose. The offense will be fine. The D? I don't know...I'll be very happy if Hart commits, of course.
September 28th, 2010 at 12:23 PM ^
I think we need Dee and when we recruit "D" players we have to get quality ones that dont have the "flight" mechanism heavily implanted in their ANS. We need to find those guys that will end up contributing even if it isnt right now.
September 28th, 2010 at 12:27 PM ^
But it's also very tough to pass on the #2 ranked athlete in the country. Lock down Dee, then recruit D with the remainder of the open schollies.
September 28th, 2010 at 12:50 PM ^
We clearly lack depth there.
/sarcasm
September 28th, 2010 at 1:09 PM ^
We've lost a lot of people. Can't we have both now?
September 28th, 2010 at 2:34 PM ^
If this were H. Clinton Dix I'd say it's a crucial recruitment because it's an obvious position of need and the kid is absolute monster. Honestly I'm much more worried about recruiting the defensive side of the ball. I'd love to get Dee Hart but I don't consider him to be a make or break recruit. We have Rawls (hopefully) as a fallback position. From what I've heard Rawls is the real deal. Don't pay attention to the recruiting rankings. Recall that Mike Hart wasn't a highly rated recruit.
We need lots of help on defense (MLB, OLB, DT, CB). Worry about that instead...
If Dee doesn't come to Michigan it's not the end of the world.
September 28th, 2010 at 2:39 PM ^
Rawls also has academic issues, so I think we need a fallback for the fallback, too.
September 28th, 2010 at 3:07 PM ^
Academic Issues. Crud. So what do we do with recruiting someone with "issues?" I don't want another Demar Dorsey debacle. While we have a reasonable number of slots available, I don't want to either over-recruit, ala Saban and Ala., or have slots go unfilled because recruits don't qualify, like last year.
September 28th, 2010 at 9:21 PM ^
If there are ANY questions about him qualifying, then I think Michigan needs to take a pass. We already have a powerback in Hopkins, so I don't think we NEED Rawls.
September 28th, 2010 at 4:11 PM ^
Would much rather have Hart. Why ? Because Michigan isn't Michigan without a premier RB. Neither are we without a stellar defense, but a superstar RB I think is more valuable than a superstar LB or CB, in the Big Ten, though the margin is rather small. Hart one cuts like Faulk did. Star recruit CBs and LBs tend to be more hit-or-miss. Though yours is a good question, because I'm still wondering if I chose correctly.
September 28th, 2010 at 4:15 PM ^
He was pretty much an instant impact DB from Freshman year, wasn't he?
September 28th, 2010 at 4:32 PM ^
I like 'em both.