If you could pick one NFL player to play on Michigan next year...

Submitted by Dan Man on March 8th, 2011 at 3:04 PM

Here's the hypothetical: if you could pick one current NFL player and have him play on Michigan's team next year, who would it be?  Ridiculous, I know, but I think it's an interesting question.

Despite my feeling that our offense will still be much better than the defense, I would pick Peyton Manning.  To me, you put Peyton in our offense and it becomes unstoppable.  I also pick Peyton over Brady because, despite my affinitly and respect for Tom Brady, I think if you take Bellichick out of the equation Peyton is a slightly better all-around QB.  Just my opinion.

I would also be tempted to take Polamalu because he would have such an enormous effect on our D, but I think that QB is by far the most important position in football.  We could also still use Denard in a variety of ways.

Who would you pick and why?

Comments

cbuswolverine

March 8th, 2011 at 4:49 PM ^

At least one idiot who chose a non-QB read my post, I guess.  I bet if you ran this question by all 120 D1 head coaches, 120 of them would choose a QB.

Go ahead and take Woodson LOLOLOL.  I'll take Brady running my offense and throwing the ball to the non-Woodson side of the field all day long and we'll see what happens.

CRex

March 8th, 2011 at 6:16 PM ^

I'll take Denard as QB thank you very much.  Since most of the offense returns he already has a rapport developed with the WRs, line and likely the starting RB (unless a true freshman RB gets the gig).  Behind Denard we have Devin as a backup who will be in his second year of working with most of those people and in third string we have a solid QB out of a good Texas school.

Whereas on defensive line we don't have a lot of depth if Will Campbell fails to get his ass in shape and we end up sliding RVB over or platooning people into the spot beside Martin.  

Suh or Alan Branch takes the double team off Martin, helps with run stopping and helps the secondary by collapsing pockets.  Imagine a D-Line where Martin is single teams, Suh is blowing through a double team and the QB is running in terror.  

 

CRex

March 9th, 2011 at 3:13 PM ^

What about the Jets when their defense threw the Pats offense into disarray for a good part of the game and Brady was sacked repeatedly / had a lot of throw aways.  I'll upgrade the defense as opposed our already fairly functional offense.

As this last season showed: Amazing offense + piss poor defense =/= quality wins

ChasingRabbits

March 8th, 2011 at 7:25 PM ^

Is there anyone left who thinks that just being in Cbus can't turn you from a good and proper M loving human being into something far far worse?

 

Just checking.

 

BTW, give me Ed Reed.  The best qb on the planet can only score each and every time he gets the ball, but probably still wouldn't. (drops, fumbles, good D)  But if the D gives up a TD every time the other team gets the ball even if they are Indiana..  well then, you are in big trouble either way.  

michgoblue

March 8th, 2011 at 3:06 PM ^

At our greastest area of need, a winner, a link to the NC team, a total team leader, plays CB, safety and even positions as a LB on certain sets.

 

GhostPoster

March 8th, 2011 at 3:08 PM ^

Not very interesting.  If you could chose one celebrity to play on Michigan next year, who would it be?  Now that's interesting.  Charlie Sheen only has one gear, GO.  That sounds like a great football attitude to me.

the_white_tiger

March 8th, 2011 at 3:15 PM ^

I'll take Ed Reed. We need a playmaker in the secondary big time, and Woodson would only be able to shut down half of the field as a corner. Plus Reed and Mattison are former co-workers, so that's nice, I guess.

Adrian

March 8th, 2011 at 3:16 PM ^

This is ridiculous. How can you pick any qb over Brady. Idk why you would take an offensive player when our offense was fine and our d was horrible. I def agree with whoever said Woodson.

slaunius

March 8th, 2011 at 3:20 PM ^

If we're talking just "who could improve the team most significantly", and put homerism and criminal history aside (it is, after all, a hypothetical), I think Michael Vick would have the single greatest impact on any team.  He has dilithium-esque speed to go with an amazing arm.

While Manning/Brady could obviously improve any team by leaps and bounds, neither can force their receivers to get open, or their offensive line to block.  Vick's speed minimizes those problems.

If you wanted to work on the defense (certainly there's more room for improvement on the margins there), I don't think you can go with a conerback, since it's too easy for offenses to just gameplan around a single corner on a crappy D.  Suh, Polamalu, and Urlacher would all be intriguing additions.

Fordschoolba09

March 8th, 2011 at 3:26 PM ^

Look, i love the woodsons and Bradys as much as the next guy but everyone is throwing out the all NFL team circa 2005... I mean Urlacher? Dude is like 40. (how long will it take someone to google Urlacher and correct me for not stating his exact age?) IMO the player i would pick is Matthews, maybe Polamalu or Ed Reed. 

michgoblue

March 8th, 2011 at 3:36 PM ^

I couldn't disagree more. 

I actually like watching Vick play.  I hate the Eagles, but watch their games to see Vick.  And you know what, he reminds me of a better version of Denard.  But, Denard is still pretty down good, and should be better this year, especiall now that he will likely be running an offense similar to that which Vick thrived in this past season.  So, swapping out Denard for Vick improves the QB position, butby how much?  I think Denard is going to dominate, anyway. 

You don't improve the position that is your strongest when you have glaring weaknesses at other positions.  I (and others) said Woodson, because he would improve the secondary drastically.  (If you don't want a Michigan player, Revis could fill a similar role, although he is less physical at the LOS than Woodson).  We also have some LB issues, so a Lamar Woodley, David Harris (or, I suppose some of the non-Michigan players mentioned up thread) would yield a MASSIVE improvement for the D.  Same with a Graham or Suh on the DE.  These are areas that we are really struggling at, that need to be addressed long before the QB.

saveferris

March 8th, 2011 at 3:29 PM ^

Despite my feeling that our offense will still be much better than the defense, I would pick Peyton Manning. To me, you put Peyton in our offense and it becomes unstoppable. I also pick Peyton over Brady because, despite my affinitly and respect for Tom Brady, I think if you take Bellichick out of the equation Peyton is a slightly better all-around QB. Just my opinion.

Lloyd Brady disagrees with your choice

 

 

jethro34

March 8th, 2011 at 3:30 PM ^

Wow, interesting question.

Like most I feel it has to be someone on D - and answers like Lewis, Woodson, Suh, Polamalu are all great.

I would add Revis (I know, I will be negged for suggesting a CB other than Charles), Woodley, or DeMarcus Ware.  Clay Matthews was crazy this year but I hate him.

pdgoblue25

March 8th, 2011 at 3:33 PM ^

As much as it pains me to say Polamalu because I hate the Steelers so much, they were 3-1 without Rapistberger, but look at how shitty they played without Polamalu in 2009.  As far as Willis or Harris, an impact Middle linebacker would be huge.

I get the Tom Brady pick, and I love him, but god I can't wait to see Denard with a year of experience.  Of course I would also take C-Wood anytime.

The Name

March 8th, 2011 at 3:39 PM ^

What about adding any player from the NBA to our current basketball team?

Dwight Howard would be unstoppable or possibly Manny Harris (too soon?)

Beavis

March 8th, 2011 at 3:40 PM ^

The easy answer is Woodson or Brady (even though we have Denard). 

The smart answer is either Chris Johnson or Adrian Peterson.  We'd be unstoppable on offense.  Defense still gets Mattison.

BiSB

March 8th, 2011 at 3:42 PM ^

"I would pick Peyton Manning"

I think we had this debate 14 years ago.  Many people voted on it, in fact.  And we definitively concluded that Chuck > Peyton: