"Big Interest" from Kevin Dillman (2015 5-Star QB)

Submitted by JimBobTressel on October 1st, 2013 at 12:03 PM

Per national analyst Ryan Bartow's free "Insider Notes" piece from today:

"3- Kevin Dillman, 5-star QB, La Mirada (Calif.) 
Michigan and Nebraska are his Top 2. If Michigan offers, the Wolverines could likely land a commitment this winter or spring"


“I grew up watching Tom Brady. If there was one offer I could wish for it would be Michigan. I really like their coaching staff,” - 5-star QB Kevin Dillman, La Mirada


Tom Brady a big reason why five-star QB Kevin Dillman (La Mirada, CA) says #Michigan is the offer he covets most: http://t.co/x5bjMRXLF0

— Steve Lorenz (@TremendousUM) September 30, 2013

All free info here, by the way. This sounds really good



October 1st, 2013 at 12:06 PM ^

Uh... him and Lucien-South.  Why are they not yet blue?  I know, trust the coaches... but they need to keep riding the wave.  JOTKA!


October 1st, 2013 at 3:29 PM ^

Doesn't OC Lutheran produce pretty good talent?

I just checked their schedule and they are undefeated headed into league play. I guess we will see how good they are when they face St john Bosco (Rivals High #5, Josh Rosen) on 10/18.

Their league schdule is actually really brutal. They have to play Servite (Rivals High #71) and Mater Dei (#34)


October 1st, 2013 at 12:11 PM ^

Seriously, is there a reason why he hasn't been offered yet? I know we have to trust the coaches, but...the 3rd best pro-style QB in the nation?

Has anyone looked at film on him yet? Is there any possible reason why we haven't offered other than an unfounded hope that Rosen suddenly decides he hates warm weather?


October 1st, 2013 at 12:34 PM ^

This seems like a great year to take a guy like that. In both 2013 and 2014, we got our plan A, Borges approved pro-style QB. Why not take a chance on a guy like this with huge upside? Worst case scenario you've got a 5 star athlete that loves Michigan. I'm sure we could find a use for him somewhere even if he doesn't pan out as a QB.


October 1st, 2013 at 12:57 PM ^

>> "The knock is that he is a great athlete, but fairly unpolished as a QB."

Did you see what Desmond Howard said on "Gameday" this past week?  He said any time a QB is described primarily as a "great athlete" it's a red flag.  He went on to say the job of a QB is first to be a great quarterback

There was some disagreement from others on the panel about that, but the more I think about it, the more it makes sense. 

That's not to say athleticism plays no role, of course.  A great QB with great athleticism is a plus, no doubt.  (Imagine Payton Manning with RGIII's legs.)  It's just that a QB can't be just a great athlete ... there's a lot of examples of how that takes a team only so far.

So the question with all these HS QBs that are "great athletes" is whether they can grow into being a great QB as well.  That's probably one of those intuitive things coaches do.

Ali G Bomaye

October 1st, 2013 at 1:11 PM ^

1. Desmond played with Elvis Grbac.  Of course he doesn't think a QB should be a great athlete.

2. Desmond works for ESPN.  His job is to say STRONG TAKES that are controversial and get people to respond to them.


October 1st, 2013 at 4:14 PM ^

for us to accept that the tall statue laser throwing QB is a proven commodity, and the athletic QB, even when accurate and a good decision maker, seems to be a flash in the pan.  Every few years there comes a Michael Vick, RG3, Kapernick, Cam Newton etc that will revolutionize the position, but for whatever reason it is short lived.  The combination of defenses catching up to the novelty of the pass-run option and perhaps the athletic QB having too many options gets him in trouble.  Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Aaron Rogers, Drew Brees...consistentlhy the top 4 QBs over the past 5 years in the NFL are the best pocket QBs...I dont think this is coincidence.  Pretty obvious to me that the ability to manage a game is more important than the ability to brak a game open with 2 or 3 "special" athletic plays a game from the QB position.  Steve Young and John Elway were the only athletic QB I trusted to run around and make the right play almost every time...and they were both incredibly efficient pocket QBs first.


October 1st, 2013 at 5:16 PM ^

I could not agree less with "the athletic QB, even when accurate and a good decision maker, seems to be a flash in the pan" statement. Michigan was tormented for decades (from Johnnie Johnson to Donovan McNabb to Troy Smith to etc etc) by passers who could also beat you with their feet. The offensive systems may change based on what defenses prepare for, but having the ability to turn a 3rd and 8 into a first down on your own, even when everyone is covered, is gold. Heck, look at Devin against UConn -- he was having major accuracy/confidence issues, but his feet allowed the offense to still make (at least some) progress.

A QB doesn't have to be as fast/run-happy as Denard, but being a rocket armed statue is definitely only one way to go.


October 1st, 2013 at 1:23 PM ^

....consider Vince Young to be a great QB? Cam Newton? Michael Vick? Not saying that all 5 star prospects labeled as an "athlete" will measure up to these guys.... but I am not automatically seeing a red flag.


October 1st, 2013 at 1:38 PM ^

>> Would you consider Vince Young to be a great QB? Cam Newton? Michael Vick?
There's a case to be made for the answer "no."  Each had success in college that did not translate up as well to the NFL.  Lots of reasons for that ... one of which is each thought their athleticism would be enough to win ballgames.  It's not.
Now it's time for me to explain what I don't mean:
  • I'm not saying athleticism is a detriment
  • I'm not saying an athletic quarterback is a bad thing
  • I'm not saying a statue QB is always superior
  • I'm not saying the recruit mentioned in the OP is not a good QB

I am saying that a QB whose primary attribute is athleticism will not be as effective as a QB with good-enough athleticism and good game decision skills.

That was Desmond Howard's point.  First and foremost a QB has to be a good QB, and being a good QB is more than just scrambling out of the pocket or keeping on a read option and going to the endzone.

Who would you rather have, Michael Vick or Tom Brady?  Cam Newton or Andrew Luck?


October 1st, 2013 at 4:05 PM ^

That's a fair point.

The key there is the quality of the defenses the athletic QB faces.  In college the average quality is spread out; in the NFL it gets much more concentrated.

So in college the athleticism attribute may well be of higher weight than the pure QB attributes.  The better a defense the athletic QB faces, the less that advantage becomes.  Alabama and LSU showed a fair amount of skill shutting down athletic QBs, including Denard Robinson.

That's why, I think, those athletic QBs see lesser production in the pros ... the defenses are simply that much better overall.  That doesn't mean they can't be successful (see RGIII his first year; see Colin Kaepernick; see Russell Wilson).  It does mean the game management skills become more important.  Couple the two and it's powerful.  Russell Wilson seems to be positioning himself as a very smart and very mobile QB.  The big question is whether RGIII is really a half-step slower and whether he can now get better at the QB decisions part of the game.

To your point -- in college, sure ... take an athletic QB who's good enough at the passing to keep defenses on their heels.

I worry about the Michigan - OSU game because it looks like Braxton Miller is really becoming a QB with both athleticism and good game management presence.  Devin Gardner has all the tools to get there himself.  Question is, will he?  We'll see.


October 1st, 2013 at 2:40 PM ^

.... isn't as easy to answer as you are implying. Young and Newton have rings... and Vick was 1 quarter from one. I was at the 2000 Sugar Bowl. Vick single handedly kept the Hokies in it for the majority of the game. I'd be happy with any of the three on our team... even though they might not be considered great QBs in the traditional sense.