Michigan's Depth By Class, 2011
This is the front-page version of the post that lives in the "useful stuff" tab updated for 2011. Since Hoke announced Michigan would be running a shifted 4-3 I've changed the defensive depth chart to reflect what's likely to happen in spring. Defensive ends have been split into strong and weakside positions and Ryan Van Bergen has been moved back into the DT row on the assumption Michigan's starting DL reads Black-Martin-Van Bergen-Roh next year. Large sections of the secondary are wild-ass guesses we won't get resolution on until Spring.
Right now Michigan has 16 slots for the 2011 class and two players who are obvious candidates to not get fifth years, so with normal attrition they'll be in the mid-twenties again next year.
As far as the end result of The Process: Michigan is two scholarships short pending tomorrow's Willingham commitment, which right now looks like it won't go M's way. In addition, they're carrying Mike Williams—a likely medical redshirt—and at least two more players who could have not gotten fifth years after graduating this spring. Michigan forewent up to five additional recruits thanks to the awkward timing of The Process. They didn't sock themselves with USC scholarship penalties—they socked themselves with half of USC's scholarship penalties.
Anyway:
MICHIGAN FOOTBALL DEPTH BY CLASS 2011 | |||||
| Position | Incoming (c/o 2015) | Freshmen (c/o 2014) | Sophomores (c/o 2013) | Juniors (c/o 2012) | Seniors (c/o 2011) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| QB (3 + 0) | D. Gardner* | D. Robinson | |||
| RB (8 - 1) | J. Hayes T. Rawls | F. Toussaint* S. Hopkins | M. Cox* V. Smith T. Jones | M. Shaw | |
| FB (0) | Kerridge# | McColgan*# | |||
| WR (8 - 3) | R. Miller* J. Robinson* D. Williamson* | J. Jackson | J. Stokes | J Hemingway* D. Stonum M. Odoms | |
| Slot (5 - 1) | J. Gallon* D. Dileo | R. Roundtree* T. Robinson* | K. Grady* | ||
| TE (2 - 1) | C. Barnett | B. Moore* | K. Koger | ||
| OT (4 - 1) | T. Posada | M. Schofield* T. Lewan* | M. Huyge* | ||
| OG (4 + 0) | C. Bryant | P. Omameh* R. Barnum* E. Mealer* | |||
| C (4 -1) | C. Pace* J. Miller | R. Khoury* | D. Molk* | ||
| DT (6 - 2) | T. Talbott* | Q.Washington* | W. Campbell | M. Martin R. VanBergen* | |
| SDE (3 + 0) | K. Wilkins* | J. Black | W. Heininger*# | ||
| WDE (3 + 0) | J Paskorz* | C. Roh | S. Watson* | ||
| LB (12 - 2) | J. Ryan* K. Jones A. Poole F. Clark D. Morgan | M. Jones* | K. Demens* | B. Herron* JB Fitzgerald K. Leach*# | |
| CB (9 - 1) | Hollowell | C. Avery T. Talbott C. Christian | JT Floyd* | T. Woolfolk* | |
| SS (6 - 1) | J. Furman* | M. Robinson T. Gordon* C. Johnson | J. Kovacs* F. Simmons# | M. Williams* | |
| FS (2 + 0) | T. Carter | R. Vinopal | |||
| P/K (3 + 0) | M. Wile | B. Gibbons* W. Hagerup | |||
| projected starters in bold, returning starters in italics. | |||||
Allotted: 83 (Counting Kovacs and Grady as a scholarship players)
Seniors: 14.
Recruits: Right now Michigan has 16 scholarships. There are two redshirt juniors who may not get fifth years if Michigan finds it needs a little wiggle room: Terrance Robinson and Mike Cox.
Latest Update: 2/2/11 – Updated for 2011.
February 2nd, 2011 at 4:39 PM ^
Those are some seriously gritty starting safeties...
February 2nd, 2011 at 5:17 PM ^
I'd like to see Carvin Johnson starting at safety personally. I really liked the way that kid put some hits on people when he got a chance late in the season.
February 2nd, 2011 at 7:57 PM ^
I will be shocked, nay, horrified if Ray "Stumpy" Vinopal is the starting FS in 2011. I expect to see Woolfolk at FS, personally.
A few other areas I feel differently than Brian:
I doubt VanBergen will slide inside to play DT. I think Campbell or Washington plays DT. VB stays outside at SDE.
I think J.B. Fitzgerald will be the starting SAM.
I think Marvin Robinson will be a starter at some position (SS or WLB) in 2011.
I don't anticipate Vincent Smith will be even in the 2 deep at RB under Hoke. Smith is a very good candidate for a transfer IMO.
February 2nd, 2011 at 8:05 PM ^
Why are people so up in arms over Vinopal? I think he did pretty well out there at FS last fall when he was asked to start. Now, I don't think he was All Big Ten, but he was a true frosh. And there's some reason he got the nod to start over MRob and Carvin. I don't know if he'll start again this fall, but I don't see why he wouldn't be the best option. He's a little smaller than a couple of the other guys, but he's just as fast (or likely faster) than his competition.
Plus Vinopal seems pretty smart, and that's necessary for FS. It's the most cerebral DB position, maybe the most of the defense. It's possible that what Vinopal lacks in ideal size, he makes up for in brains. He's also fast and likes to hit. Why is everyone so against him?
February 3rd, 2011 at 6:17 AM ^
I really think that Vinopal has a shot at developing into a really good starter if can develop some size and strength. Though it says a lot about our safety play for the last several years, his INT against Bowling Green was one of the more instinctive plays Michigan's had in the defensive backfield for a while.
In all honesty, I'll be much happier with Vinopal starting than Kovacs. God bless the guy for all his toughness and heart, but I don't think Jordan's getting any bigger or faster at this point. If he's still starting this season, I think that will be a disappointing statement on our depth at SS.
February 2nd, 2011 at 4:44 PM ^
Those 5 Schollies will be better used on next years class. It was sad to lose Kris Frost and Dee, but in the end I'm okay with this class and optomistic about next year
February 2nd, 2011 at 4:44 PM ^
They signed 30 guys in this class. At least the NCAA doesn't have enforcement problems.
February 2nd, 2011 at 4:52 PM ^
I noticed Talbott listed as a DT and CB (as of this post). Thought there should probably be a different name there for us.
February 2nd, 2011 at 4:55 PM ^
this is a joke, right? the talbotts are brothers.
February 2nd, 2011 at 4:56 PM ^
Of course it is. C'mon.
Where's Keyshawn when you need him.
February 2nd, 2011 at 4:55 PM ^
Please be kidding.
February 2nd, 2011 at 4:52 PM ^
I hope our offensive line stays healthy in 2011! That is scary thin.
Hoke mentioned in his presser today: "there's the possibility that this class could grow by a few," so maybe Michigan will still sign an offensive lineman.
February 2nd, 2011 at 4:59 PM ^
Noticed that too. Depth at OG and OT (especially) are super thin, especially after this season. Youch!
February 2nd, 2011 at 5:14 PM ^
I am just as concerned with the depth right after Denard. This blog already has this team down for 9 wins and looking at the schedule that is about a 50/50 proposition IF this team stays healthy.
February 2nd, 2011 at 4:54 PM ^
Am I crazy, or are all of the graduation years at the top off by one?
February 2nd, 2011 at 4:59 PM ^
They are. Seniors would play football in fall 2011 and then traditionally graduate after the winter 2012 term.
February 2nd, 2011 at 5:00 PM ^
Brian must have been thinking of just the playing year and not the receive the diploma year
February 2nd, 2011 at 4:55 PM ^
with the lack of top players at WR after this year, not taking a chance on lucien is a little confusing.
February 2nd, 2011 at 4:59 PM ^
There has to be a reason why the staff wanted him for defense only. I agree w/ other posters that there are other more-pressing spots than the WR. It'd be nice, but let's just see what happens.
February 2nd, 2011 at 5:37 PM ^
We have more pressing needs than WR, plus that is a position where a true freshman can make an impact.
February 2nd, 2011 at 6:35 PM ^
i'm talking about outside receiver, not slot or a combination of the two.
February 2nd, 2011 at 5:01 PM ^
for Kovacs.
February 2nd, 2011 at 5:02 PM ^
the walkon hash, obvs.
February 2nd, 2011 at 5:05 PM ^
Because he's considered a scholarship player. See the allotment.
February 2nd, 2011 at 5:15 PM ^
Just looking at that depth chart, I have to wonder why we took like so many LBs and CBs and so few OL players?
I know that defense has been a glaring problem, but we already have a ton of young CBs. I could see the logic if these were all guys who were too good to turn away, but some of these are "generic 3* guys", so I wonder if we are going to take generic 3* guys, why not take a few more generic 3* linemen?
Possible answer: Are some of these kids viewed as potential (re)openings for pipelines into some of the local schools who have good kids coming out in the future but for some reason are down on M?
February 2nd, 2011 at 5:51 PM ^
How many o-linemen get out there on kickoff or punt teams? Need to have depth at LB and DB for that.
February 2nd, 2011 at 8:54 PM ^
Isn't it obvious that when Hoke and his coordinators reviewed the film from every Michigan game last year, they came to the conclusion that the immediate need for this team (based on current and future personnel) was defense ? They recruited for the immediate need. Did they get everyone they wanted ... nope, but in a very short time they evaluated and recruited as best they could ... and better than most everyone thought.
Go Blue !
February 2nd, 2011 at 9:25 PM ^
Actually, we're fine at C and OT. It's OG where we're thin. We really could have used Fisher, and I hope there's still some OG out there on the staff's charts that we don't know about. Otherwise we're starting a true freshman in 2013, with freshman backups.
February 2nd, 2011 at 9:59 PM ^
at OT. Bryant and Posada are probably G's, and we have 3 OT's on the roster
<br>I think Khoury can play G, and Barnum at OT in a pinch. But OT is a desperate, bleeding need for 2012.
February 2nd, 2011 at 10:15 PM ^
As a crisis. Not sure why you say Posada projects as a guard when the staff projects him as tackle. Going by the depth chart, year after next we start 2 juniors, have a sophomore backup and, hopefully, 2 high-quality freshman recruits. While that's not ideal, I don't see this as impending doom.
The problem at OG is that once our 3 juniors graduate (or god-forbid, leave for the NFL early), we've got exactly one dude to fill two spots. Obviously we'll recruit more, but that means it's true freshman time. Again.
February 2nd, 2011 at 10:35 PM ^
Hoke said today that Posada is a guard. That leaves a senior Huyge and 2 sophomores this fall.
February 2nd, 2011 at 10:59 PM ^
"surprise recruits" thread and answer your own question with the concern noted there (I noticed you changed OT to OG, but you were actually more correct when you typed it wrong)
BTW, Fisher was not a G, he was a T. But regardless, both spots are thin. My issue was with your statement that we were fine at T. This is not remotely true. I would say yes, we are fine at Center.
February 3rd, 2011 at 12:42 AM ^
As I mixed the two up while typing. A hazard of posting from a mobile phone in SE Asia. Suffice to say, I'm concerned about what happens when the current juniors graduate or leave. We're thin, thin, thin.
Any solutions we can come up with within the current roster make me happy.
February 3rd, 2011 at 9:13 AM ^
I think they gambled on Fisher and Nowicki and lost. It would have been nice to have seen a stronger run at Flavin, but given the state of the defense and special teams it's likely DB and LB got prioritized for bodies.
February 2nd, 2011 at 5:16 PM ^
He was not amazing last year, don't you put JT Floyd on the field ahead of Avery or Vinopal?
February 2nd, 2011 at 5:36 PM ^
Floyd was the worst tackler on the team, which is saying something.
February 3rd, 2011 at 9:16 AM ^
I don't think so. Avery was starting to become a decent coverage guy at the end of the season and Vinopal will arguably be a better tackler and has more FS experience.
February 2nd, 2011 at 5:19 PM ^
This has been a major topic of conversation on the board over the last two months. Has there been any news? I figured that since Brian listed him as a redshirt there might of been some information that I missed.
Thanks! GO BLUE!
February 2nd, 2011 at 11:39 PM ^
According to Hoke we wont know until much later in the process. IIRC he said something like towards the end of his eligibility; I'm not sure what he meant by that.
February 2nd, 2011 at 5:20 PM ^
Needs for 2012 recruiting:
1QB
1FB (assuming you always want two on the roster)
At least 2OT ("" five on the roster)
At least 3OG, perhaps one redshirted. ("five on the roster)
1DT (five on the roster)
1FS (three on the roster)
That's not bad at all. We have 9 glaring needs and only 14 seniors.
As others have said, we are SO thin on the offensive line this year.
February 2nd, 2011 at 5:28 PM ^
I wouldn't say that's an exhaustive list of our needs. I'd throw in a WR,TE,2nd DT and either switch the FB to a RB or add a RB.
February 2nd, 2011 at 6:01 PM ^
The large class in 2010 and the focus on DB and LB in this class set up the future classes fairly well. The issue is that where there are deficiencies (DT, OL, TE) they are severe:
DT (2): With both starters gone after 2011 there isn't any (yet) proven talent to come in in 2012. One DT recruit certainly won't be enough unless Campbell/Washington/Ash emerge as viable starters.
OL (5): It may be premature to access positions but 6 players over 3 classes (2009-11) is devastatingly thin. Lewan/Schofield should be starters through 2013, but there is desperate need for depth behind them at OT. The OG situation is also very open with Bryant (and Posada?) being the only options after the three senior OGs graduate in 2012. I agree the target should be 5, at a minum. Several will have to play as redshirt freshman.
TE (2): Three TE on a roster is pretty thin for a pro-style offense. You want to have 4 or even 5. With Koger graduating you'll need 2 TE recruits just to get to 4.
Those 3 position groups could make up nearly half a recruiting class by themselves - so it's a good thing the other positions are (generally) well-stocked. It'll be a challenge for Michigan to identify how it will allocate it's other scholarships, especially when some higher profile players considering UofM (who Michigan won't want to turn down) don't necessarily fit positions of need.
It probably won't matter because we'll see attrition, position changes, etc. that'll make this depth chart look very different come December.
February 2nd, 2011 at 6:18 PM ^
A 2nd DT, RB, pro-style WR, and TE. Also, you have to look at the talent available close by next year. The DE from Toledo has a HIGH interest in Michigan and is one of the very best defensive players in OH. I say he gets an offer. And there are two very good LB's in the state next year. My point is if there is (are) some really good athlete(s) with an interest in Michigan at some position, that has to be taken into consideration too.
February 2nd, 2011 at 5:27 PM ^
What are the odds that Furman ends up at LB or that someone, Carvin, Marvin, JT end up at FS?
February 2nd, 2011 at 5:42 PM ^
id love to see carvin at free safety and marvin at stong safety...hopefully furman moves to lb
February 2nd, 2011 at 10:13 PM ^
Or Christian, or whoever else proves themselves at that spot. MRob was back there for the last several games, but I'd also like to see him at SS
<br>However it turns out, will not resemble the doomsday-enhanced scenario above. We're not going forward with 9 CB's, 6/7 SS's, and just 2 FS's (one of those being a true freshman).
February 2nd, 2011 at 5:52 PM ^
2 comments:
Has Gardner received the medical redshirt, because you seem to be assuming he will?
Kenny Wilkins is listed on the Purdue boxscore, so I don't think he qualifies as a redshirt.
February 2nd, 2011 at 6:45 PM ^
Wilkins did not play against Purdue:
http://www.mgoblue.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/111310aaa.html
Purdue's box score has him listed as making a tackle actually made by Obi Ezeh, on a 3rd and 12 play in the last minute of the game. Purdue's box score is wrong, if you check the game broadcast.
February 2nd, 2011 at 7:14 PM ^
Thanks. That's good news.
February 2nd, 2011 at 5:53 PM ^
So Kerridge for sure accepted the walk-on position? I never saw a conformation of this.
Comments