Jon Benke

January 16th, 2012 at 12:49 AM ^

Yeah, but you can say you want 5/6 OL, as in .. you want to take that many, but when you're filling out a class, and what is in abundance is more OL, you take the extra OL.  Especially when you have the depth we do.  Heck, Kalis and Garnett might play as a true freshmen, so it's not as if they'll all red-shirt.  Some will play right away.


January 16th, 2012 at 8:50 AM ^

The notion that even though there are 3 Dline coaches on the staff, and the fact they they are currenty not recruiting any DT's, and haven't for a long time even though they supposedly need them by all the internet experts is kind of funny.



January 15th, 2012 at 11:48 PM ^

Is that Garnett didn't say a damn thing about his trip to Stanford on his Twitter. Probably means nothing, but he couldn't stop talking about Michigan on his Twitter before/during and after his Michigan visit.


January 16th, 2012 at 9:47 AM ^ the MGoBoard, the proper place for your good suggestion is right here. Just start a recruit recruiter appreciation thread and, voila... you've accomplished your goal without being the creepy dude on Twitter trying to start conversations with 17/18 year olds.

And I realize that's the sort of thing you had in mind.


January 16th, 2012 at 12:35 AM ^

Good lineman are the most difficult to rate for the next level, and with the generally high football IQ can play multiple positions we also need real depth in year two. I think we can take all three reeves and wright and be ok. Or one of them and grant.




January 16th, 2012 at 8:21 AM ^

As was said earlier, a huge OL class isn't so much of an issue because the ridiculously small numbers of OL in the previous 2 classes (that are still here, that is) means that some of them will be forced into the 2-deep and not redshirt, which to some extent means the class will be split into two classes, kind of - the true freshman half and the ones who end up as the following years redshirt freshmen.


January 16th, 2012 at 9:33 AM ^

Having a 7 OL "commitment" class, with the last two being elite prospects represents what I call a hight quality problem. The potential outcomes, none bad, are:

1) A commit, probably someone who feels they are last in the playing time pecking order decommits, opening up a roster spot for a position of need, and getting us to the 6 player "target".

2) One player, likely to be an economics major focusing on the teachings of Adam Smith, understands supply and demand and converts to DT, adding depth at a position thin on numbers in this class.

3) We have a 7 person OL class, chock full of top talent. Half play in 2012 and half redshirt to plump up for B10 play. In 2-3 years we have the best OL in the nation.





January 16th, 2012 at 9:36 AM ^

Greg biggins over at espn is saying that Stanford is the team to beat now for Garnett. Biggins has a really good success rate when it comes to these things. I really hope he's wrong though. Kozan would be nice to have either way. We just need a decent amount of these kids to red shirt so they can develop and not have to worry about crazy low depth numbers for another 5 years.