Kelvin Grady asked to move to DB?

Submitted by His Dudeness on August 24th, 2010 at 9:28 AM

I just heard Kelvin was asked to move to DB. After his great camp and spring what is the opinion about the switch? He looks the most like a possible DB out of any of the slots, IME.

Comments

spider

August 24th, 2010 at 12:13 PM ^

When is this defense ever going to start improving. We can't have a bunch of converted offensive players starting...Gordon, Mundros, and now Grady.

This could not only be the worse U of M defense, but one of the worse in the histroy of CFB.

Yes, injuries and transfers continue to be a problem that we do not have much control over....but this is an issue that every team has to deal with

spider

August 24th, 2010 at 2:33 PM ^

But my strategy is pretty clear this year: Talk as if Mich will have the woirse defense in CFB history and then be pleased when it doesn;t happen.

The last two years I have said they will be much better defensively and I was dissapointed.

But to hear that we are moving a slot (Grady) who was doiung very well to DB, just further confirms disaster

HHW

August 24th, 2010 at 10:41 AM ^

Hopefully, that has all changed the morning of Sept 5th.  Food will taste better, air will smell cleaner, the sun will be brighter, our sense of humor will return, and UM will have one less win needed to become bowl eligible.

BlockM

August 24th, 2010 at 9:30 AM ^

This would surprise me, as Rodriguez just said in a press conference that no one from the offense would be moving to the defense. I wouldn't have a problem with it, but I wouldn't expect it to happen.

icefins26

August 24th, 2010 at 9:32 AM ^

Cough: Rivals: Cough...no but really, I heard the same thing.  I don't want to piss off the Rivals mafia but I think that's the source.  If this is true, I'd be happy -- just hope Kelvin embraces it.

Greg McMurtry

August 24th, 2010 at 9:54 AM ^

Roundtree and Odoms have impressed me enough in actual games to hold down the slot postition along with Stonum at WR.  In the past, Grady has shown little at the SR and has dropped several easy catches.  There is also some depth at SR behind 'Tree/Odoms.  If Grady can play corner well enough to challenge for the spot opposite JT Floyd, move him.

Michigan Shirt

August 24th, 2010 at 2:41 PM ^

Agree, although he could be a two-way player if he really did have that good of a spring and summer. He probably wouldn't have had many snaps at SR as it is so you cannot really expect him to be overworked playing both positions.

The program

August 24th, 2010 at 9:41 PM ^

I agree with you and lets not forget that last year Grady showed well in camp but had problems catching and holding on to the ball in games if he is playing DB those are no longer issues and we know he can run.  What do you have to lose by making this move

UMdad

August 24th, 2010 at 9:56 AM ^

Howeva, I would assume that if he switched to DB it would be to add a little depth as well.  If we had a walk-on (although I realize that he was an accomplished high school player) backup slot receiver who moves to defense 2 weeks before the start of the season playing any significant minutes we are more screwed than I thought.

acs236

August 24th, 2010 at 9:58 AM ^

Grady can actually contribute at CB.  That seems somewhat doubtful considering he hasn't played the position in college and there are less than two weeks left in camp.  I thought he was going to contribute to the offense a bit more this year, but perhaps the suggested move speaks to that.

HHW

August 24th, 2010 at 9:33 AM ^

Maybe after Gibson stayed up all night watching scrimmage film his reaction was to curl up on RichRod's door step in the fetal position and cry himself to sleep.  He might have resorted to beg for some help from the offense.

MGauxBleu

August 24th, 2010 at 10:20 AM ^

If I didn't hear it from CFN, bleacherreport, Deadspin, Weekly World News (hereunto know as "the paper") Chicago Sun-Times, Chicago Tribune, Lane Kiffin's publicist, Fox News then I really don't give it much credibility.

Magnus

August 24th, 2010 at 10:29 AM ^

They're "more reliable" or they're "quicker to report [possibly erroneous] stories"?

I remember a few "commitments" reported on Scout that never actually happened...

johnvand

August 24th, 2010 at 11:57 AM ^

Depends on who is reporting it.

Take anything Tom Beaver "breaks" with the largest grain of salt you can find.  I'd trust any of the rivals guy's over him.

When Sam speaks, it's usually because he's heard a thing or two from a reliable person or two.

ish

August 24th, 2010 at 9:39 AM ^

seems kind of odd given that RR said no offensive players would be asked to switch and given the rave reviews of grady's performance.

mrduckworthb

August 24th, 2010 at 9:48 AM ^

Sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do, whether RR wants to or not, he is to thin at CB to ignore the lack of speed back there. Now IF it is actually Kelvin Grady moving back there (unknown to me who it could be as Rivals is paywalled) then the speed problem is a little bit of a smaller one for the defensive backfield. Hopefully Kelvin is going to step in a shut shit down, but I agree it's strange RR said he wouldn't be moving anybody so soon after T-Wolf's injury. I think it was to soon for him to make that decision, but nothing is for sure just because it's online.

P.S. If Kelvin stays at SR, it will be very telling, but if he goes to CB then it is one helluva telling story.

M_Go_Bleu

August 24th, 2010 at 11:42 PM ^

RR said no offensive players would be asked to switch

Is he an offensive "player" if he's not going to play? Okay that's a slight exaggeration, but he wasn't going to start. There's no reason he can't play both ways if need be. Extraordinary circumstances call for desperate measures. I don't think KG will start at CB right away, but traditionally receivers have been a natural switch to CB, because of their speed, hips, knowledge of receiver's schemes, and ball skills (usually). This could work well. You just have to give it time.