Mike Shaw Has Speed!

Submitted by cbishop on April 15th, 2010 at 7:39 PM

Don't get me wrong, i knew Shaw was bringing along some good speed to michigan, but i had no idea he was this fast in highschool.

www.milesplit.com is a website where you can type in track runners' names from around the country, and check out some of their times.

It lists Shaw as running a PR of 10.39 in the 100m dash, as well as a 21.19 in the 200m.

Here are some other wolverines and their HS times:

Denard Robinson - 10.44 100m , 21.89 200m
Demar Dorsey - 10.53 100m , 21.48 200m
Troy Woolfolk - 10.52 100m , 21.46 200m
Darryl Stonum - 21.62 200m
Terrence Robinson - 10.78 100m , 21.87 200m
Fitzgerald Toussaint - 10.74 100m
Martavious Odoms - 10.80 100m
D.J. Williamson - 10.66 100m , 21.64 200m

So for those people who dont know much about track, its save to say, Michigan sure does have some speed!



April 15th, 2010 at 7:47 PM ^

Um, Michael Shaw was the NATIONAL CHAMPION in the 200m in high school. I see that you're new, but this is not new news. His high school meets were covered in depth, especially when he ran at nationals.

But yes, he's very fast.


April 15th, 2010 at 8:00 PM ^

But if it were that simple, the NFL would be made up solely of track stars at the RB position. Not disagreeing with you that we will indeed be fast this year, but will that speed translate to anything? For example, Mike Hart - not all that fast, but a damn effective college RB. I do think that all of this speed is a good thing, but without a line that will open op lanes and give the WRs time to get open, or without good QB play, all of this speed will amout to little.


April 15th, 2010 at 8:04 PM ^

Yes, speed is not the only important attribute. But all things held equal, having a dude with lightning speed carrying the ball sure is a bonus.

And of all the things you should be worrying about for this fall, the OL is not one of them.


April 15th, 2010 at 8:05 PM ^

If Shaw ever stays healthy AND gets a bit of blocking, I think we'll see some big-time runs from him. I think he's our biggest breakaway threat since Tyrone Wheatley, but things haven't fallen into place for him just yet...


April 15th, 2010 at 8:44 PM ^

During the Carr years, I was seen as overly optimistic. Now that Rodriguez is here, I'm seen as pessimistic.

Oh well. I see myself as a realist. Things were better during the Carr years than people want to admit. And I think Rodriguez *can* right the ship at Michigan if he's given the chance, but it remains to be seen whether he'll be given the opportunity...

Anyway, thanks for the compliment, but I'm not the most informed member of the MGoCommunity. Perhaps just the most outspoken. There are plenty of people here with good info (jamiemac, gsimmons85, MGoObes, steve sharik, etc.).

Frank Drebin

April 16th, 2010 at 8:48 AM ^

I agree with him being a breakaway threat, but I see him as Carlos Brown 2.0. Both are very fast, and both are very injured all of the time. Brown had that home run ability but was always sidelined with an injury. I hope Shaw can stay healthy and be that big play guy, but I just see a lot of similarities.


April 15th, 2010 at 8:06 PM ^

I actually appreciate this from the OP - I somehow missed all this about Shaw. And perhaps others here may have missed it also. And, if we didn't know this about Shaw it is impossible to search for it. Yes, it's good to have a general rule to not bring up old material, but I think some exceptions are fine.


April 15th, 2010 at 8:12 PM ^

type runs back and forth and up and down the field while the Benny Hill song is playing in the back ground, chances are he won't have to run that far or long for us. Don't get me wrong, it's great he was the 200 meter champion, I just don't think he has to be fast that long for us. I say, 150 yards, tops.


April 15th, 2010 at 10:12 PM ^

...are old news, but I think putting them together like this is new. I think the OP deserves credit for bringing this to everyone's attention.

PF 34

April 16th, 2010 at 12:09 AM ^

Shaw's vision is sub-par.. I don't think that he will really make much of an impact this year or anytime in the future at the running back position. When healthy, I think Vincent Smith is by far our best back.


April 16th, 2010 at 12:15 AM ^

Although I don't totally disagree with your post, I think you went too extreme on both points. Shaw's vision might not be great, but his athleticism might be enough to make him an impact back, but maybe not a star.

As for Vincent Smith, he might be our best back, but saying he's our best back by far is a big stretch. Against Big Ten competition, VS had a handful of good plays, and a bunch of average ones. Statistically, he might be ahead of the rest, but he has his own limitations. Keep in mind that Fitz was injured during last fall, and had he been healthy he might have gotten the ball over Smith, we'll never know. Had you said "a healthy V Smith has the edge," I would have bought it. Saying he is "by far our best back" after doing very, very little, yet slightly more than the rest, is a very premature statement.


April 16th, 2010 at 12:48 AM ^

He depends on his quicks more than raw speed, so let's hope he recovers fully.

Man, my last two posts have been depressing, injury-related comments. Let's hope that with the Big House invasive surgery over, the Michigan God will be in a better mood. He's been pissed for the past two years.


April 16th, 2010 at 6:04 AM ^

Against non-DSU opponents, our running backs' career stats are:

1. Cox: 2 carries, 31 yards, 0 TD (15.5 yards per carry)

2. Brown: 201 carries, 1025 yards, 8 TD (5.10 yards per carry)

3. Minor: 331 carries, 1658 yards, 20 TD (5.01 yards per carry)

4. Moundros: 3 carries, 14 yards, 1 TD (4.7 yards per carry)

5. Shaw: 75 carries, 327 yards, 2 TD (approximately 4.3 yards per carry)

6. Grady: 192 carries, 710 yards, 10 TD (3.70 yards per carry)

7. Smith: 31 carries, 110 yards, 0 TD (3.55 yards per carry)

Statistically, Vincent Smith is the worst running back we have and/or had last year. Yeah, it's a small sample size, but the point is that saying Vincent Smith is "by far our best back" is in complete absence of any statistical backing.

I'm not making the argument that Michael Cox is necessarily our best back, by the way, but I listed the players by their rushing average.

Hoken's Heroes

April 16th, 2010 at 7:13 AM ^

...when you can't get out of the back field or stopped at the LOS.

It's like ground hog day on here with people talking about how "fast" UM players are. Yes, many UM players are fast in a straight line speed. How has that speed really translated to the football field so far in game situations?

Sure, DR had 2 or 3 big plays but let's get realistic here. For any of these guys to show their speed, the rest of the Offense needs to do their job to open up bigger holes than Pam Anderson's you know what for these guys to bust through. For me, I only want this team to move the chains and score on well executed plays instead of trying for the home run every play. While I won't mind seeing some nice bust out plays like the ones that OSU has been successful in doing against UM the last several years, this team needs to learn how to execute first. Hopefully this year will be that year.