Next years D-line.. Defense..
I think next years D is gonna be dominate. The D-line will be crazy good. Brandon graham is gonna be an all american and top pick in 2010 draft. Mike martin is gonna be one of the next greats too, look what he did now as a backup, and only 2 months on campus before first game, now he has whole offseason to get ready for. William campbell too, he will prob be a wolverine committing wise, and i hear hes gonna enroll early. Those 3 right there will be one good d-line.
As for linebackers, im not sure. But I know obi ezeh is gonna be all-conference if not better than that.
D-backs will be good. Trent is gone, he was horrible. Warren/cissoko will run the show.
Safties, I know brandon smith will be playing so we can see what hes made of.
I know this is short info, but lets talk about the defense.. Theyll be solid next yr.
And coach shafer, i know he did horrible as a d-coord this yr personally, butits his first yr in the conference, maybe he will do alot of reviewing, video watching, etc to get ready for 09 season.
December 8th, 2008 at 3:27 AM ^
Think our safeties were bad this year? Now, let's replace Brandon Harrison with a freshman, redshirt freshman, or one of the several other options who wasn't good enough to replace Stewart and Brown.
But linebacker should be decent. Toward the end of the season, Mouton showed tremendous improvement. He looked better than Ezeh.
But the D-Line should be good, and the corners should be fairly good. Really, I think it's a stretch to say our D will be great, but they'll be better than this year. There simply wasn't enough good senior leadership. Morgan Trent was a cancer with a terrible attitude.
Brandon Graham will lead this unit next year. Hopefully, to success.
December 8th, 2008 at 8:50 AM ^
"Morgan Trent was a cancer with a terrible attitude."
Why do you say that?
December 8th, 2008 at 10:13 AM ^
Morgan Trent didn't play particularly well. But where does the "cancer with a terrible attitude" come from?
December 8th, 2008 at 10:17 AM ^
Sounds like John Dean's quote to Nixon during the Watergate crisis about a "cancer within the presidency".
December 8th, 2008 at 10:26 AM ^
Really. WTF? If anything Trent was at the very least an excellent leader on this team despite it's record. He will be missed for that reason.
December 8th, 2008 at 12:57 PM ^
defend morgan trent wagon here -
In every interview I saw with him he seemed like a generally nice and pretty humble kid. No evidence of being a 'cancer'. unless he is a really really good actor, I would even say he was more 'glue' than 'cancer'.
December 8th, 2008 at 12:04 PM ^
Say what you want about Morgan Trent, but whenever I think of him, this play comes to mind:
Now, I'm sure you can bring up 10 times as many plays where he looks like a jackass (I'd argue you can find more "Johnny Sears looks like a jackass" plays, which is especially impressive considering the brevity of his tenure, but that's another story), but I wouldn't be so quick to call him a cancer.
December 8th, 2008 at 3:33 PM ^
"Dude, big deal, Trent just had an angle on Harvin. Harvin is still faster. You've obviously never played football. If you take the right angle, you don't have to be fast."
December 8th, 2008 at 4:25 PM ^
that's still what a ton of people will forever remember when they hear the name Morgan Trent.
December 8th, 2008 at 6:11 PM ^
You obviously don't know anything about geometry. Go take a look at a 90* triangle. Which line is longest? The angled one. Go look at the video. Trent was 5 yards further downfield than Harvin when the footrace began. It's nothing about angles, and all about distance.
December 8th, 2008 at 6:25 PM ^
Considering Sommy put his comment in quotes, I'm guessing he was being sarcastic.
December 8th, 2008 at 7:50 PM ^
i didn't even notice the quotes myself. i also hate Internet sarcasm as half the people never pick up on it since you need facial expressions and voice tone to pick that up
December 9th, 2008 at 12:26 AM ^
The angled one?
December 8th, 2008 at 4:20 AM ^
if Shafer leaves like people were talking about?
Maybe that was already shot down; I don't remember the details.
Anyway, my prediction is that our D should be competent next year, but definitely not dominant. Our rush defense should be better-than-average with the young talent showing up and BG sticking it out (a lot of this depends on Big Will's re-commitment which is sounding more and more promising). I was glad to hear that BG served as chauffeur for Will's visit, because I think that establishes him as a leader to the young guys, and I'd like to see him grow into that role in the offseason (let's just pray we have year-long captains next year in BG, Minor, and whoever else).
Our secondary still worries me entirely.
I hope Warren and Cissoko can live up to their hype because I have huge expectations for at least Warren.
LBs should be fine, and might step up and be great. Wait-and-see approach here.
Safety is what worries me the most, like every year. If we can get some LB recruits with a lot of speed moved to safety, I think that'd be a great move (look what USC has done with huge safeties). Or just pray to god that moving down the depth chart there's a hidden gem.
I have a huge amount of confidence that our defense will have a significant turn-around from this year, but I have doubt that it will dominate. If it can though, that might be our early ticket back to the BCS as our offense will grow, but have to deal with having a freshman (or thus-far-incompetent) QB.
Either way, our offense should be good enough to keep our D off the field for a majority of the game, so a repeat of this year is out of the question.
December 8th, 2008 at 12:16 PM ^
Competent is good. I don't think competent would have lost the Utah game or the Purdue game, competent certainly wouldn't have lost the Toledo game, and hell, competent won the Wisconsin game. Competent could have had us at 6-6 playing CMU in Detroit. (Maybe it's good that we were so incompetent at times...)
If Shafer can scrape together competence and get off the damn field after a couple sets of downs to give a young offense more playing time then I might rethink calling for his head after the Purdue debacle.
December 8th, 2008 at 6:02 AM ^
To be honest, I felt that the 3 and outs and turnovers of our offense was what did in our defense the most this year. If our offense improves, I think we'll be fine.
December 8th, 2008 at 6:18 AM ^
I think we'll be pretty good. The only position for concern is at Safety. I am optimistic because I think Brandon Smith will play really well at Safety. DE is a bit of a concern too because we only have one of those. Maybe Roh or LaLota will be good enough to step in. We should be real good at D.
December 8th, 2008 at 6:22 AM ^
our safety play was so terrible...the worst in Michigan history...that any new guys would surely be an upgrade. Steve Brown, aka "The Gambler" had better get his act together and play TEAM defense and stop being so selfish trying to make plays...which he can not.
The other young guys are encouraging from an athletic and size standpoint...if they can get coached up, they will surely be better than Stewart and Harrison who blew.
I almost think that if I had any eligibilty left, I could have played better than those guys right now... at least i wouldnt be out of position so badly...those guys sucked. Period.
It is also encouraging that our defensive staff seems to recognize how bare the cupboard is back there and is recruiting the safety positions hard.
Regarding the D Line...I dont think they will "dominate" next year, but they should hold their own... especially if Will is there to get some time in the middle... the talent level certainly has been upgraded there...again imo our coaching staff has targeted this as one of the areas that they are recruiting hard for. 2010 is the year that they should be a dominant unit.
December 8th, 2008 at 10:45 AM ^
was disproven pretty thoroughly a number of times this year. If it were true we would have seen David Cone take a few snaps at QB.
December 8th, 2008 at 6:25 AM ^
Unfortunately, I was reading how Tripp Welbourne an excellent safety for the Wolverines in the mid 80s has been diagnosed with cancer at the young age of 44. This is terrible news and we all hope he gets through it ok.
It was also a reminder of the fact that when Tripp played... Michigan RARELY got beat by big plays... it almost never happened where Michigan got beat by long bombs with the guy having 2 steps on our guy....our or safety being so out of position that a 5 yd off tackle play becomes a routine 50 yd TD like it does now.
Basically the talent had better coaching back in Bo's era...and guess who was the DB coach at the time?
Lloyd Carr.
December 8th, 2008 at 11:58 AM ^
......who has lung cancer.....its his safety running mate Vada Murray.
Sad story, regardless.....Vada is in all our prayers.
Vada and Tripp were the starting safeties in 1988 and 1989, back to back outright big 10 champions.
They were a kick ass duo.
December 8th, 2008 at 6:42 PM ^
Im sorry I got the two confused...I will edit my post above. My best to Vada Murray.
December 8th, 2008 at 6:43 AM ^
I think Michigan's win against Duke has clouded all your minds.
There's no reason to think Michigan's defense will be better next year other than they will (presumably) be in their second year in Shafer's defense.
The defensive line will be worse. Van Bergen is a downgrade from Jamison. Sagesse is probably a downgrade from Johnson; Campbell might even be a downgrade, too. Remember, defensive line is often a position where people redshirt. The coaching staff was amazed that Martin was so physically ready. Campbell will be a good player, but he's not the health/lifting freak that Martin was.
The linebackers will probably be better with another year of experience. Thompson's replacement will most likely be a step up from him.
The secondary will probably be just as bad - or worse. Harrison was good in run support and had excellent speed, and he will probably be replaced by Brandon Smith, who many people think/thought should move to LB. He'll be at safety with Steve Brown, who has shown virtually zero improvement in his three years at Michigan. (Michael Williams could also play.) Warren was okay in coverage this year, but I'm not sure that Cissoko is an upgrade from Trent.
I don't know where all this optimism is coming from. I mean, I hope for good things, but I'm not necessarily expecting them.
December 8th, 2008 at 10:30 AM ^
Don't know what UMs rank for defense was this year but I would put money on them being better next year because of how bad they were this year and that it won't happen again.
Offense should be better and give more time to the D on the sidelines, which IMO should be a big help instead of the constent 3 and out.
I also see Mike Martine being a great player and if we can get a couple of freshmen (Big Will) in there I think our run defense could be very good.
Too bad we have to wait a whole year to see who is right and wrong.
December 8th, 2008 at 10:35 AM ^
I agree that the statistics might improve as our offense improves. I mean, that only makes sense, given that we'll have more time of possession.
But as far as actual positions, I don't see how people realistically expect them to improve.
December 8th, 2008 at 7:06 AM ^
obi ezeh is overrated if you ask me. yes, he makes a lot of tackles but any LB would when our defense was on the field for the majority of the game. he misses too many tackles and his play recognition needs to improve. i really like mouton and hope he continues to mature. i think jb fitzgerald will start at the other LB spot next year unless we win the jelani jenkins sweepstakes.
as for safety, i hope brandon smith has a healthy spring and takes stevie "i am the worst angle taker" brown's job. vlad emilien could see some PT too. warren and boubacar are 2 pretty good corners. i think this is the year where we finally see donovan warren's full potential. he has learned new systems for two years and i think he will be all big ten next year.
defensive line will be our strength next year. BG will get double teamed on most plays and that frees up others for one on one situations. i thought van bergen had a good year this year and will step up next year. he has a high motor and hustles his ass off. who knows this juco from pahokee florida (mcphee) could commit to us and see some snaps too
December 8th, 2008 at 8:50 AM ^
we *could* be solid on D next year for 2 reasons.
1)much like the OL, i think we'll be improved at LB due to depth and 2nd year system/general experience. we certainly can't get much worse at LB.
2)the offense becoming competent & more consistent will help the defense, as mentioned. fewer 3&outs. better FP, etc.
plus, if SB will be a Sr... maybe his good play/mistake ratio has peaked already.... but one can hope, right? remember, issues w/ personnel on the Dline could be mitigated by a 3 man front (assuming the LB play is much better of course).
December 8th, 2008 at 10:10 AM ^
we thought the D would be dominating this year but they ended up not being dominant enough. I'm hoping the D will be about the same and the O will step up and take pressure of the D.
December 8th, 2008 at 10:44 AM ^
If they don't spend 40 minutes on the field every game, their yards per game will decrease. So - an improved offense will help them. That said, I don't expect a big change.
December 8th, 2008 at 11:11 AM ^
Was a favorite of mine who brought the wood. Will be praying for him and his family.
December 8th, 2008 at 11:53 AM ^
I put together a spreadsheet of projected improvement that I've been struggling to get posted as a Diary. Basically it's a way of charting based on recruit star levels, so a guy at 5.0 is a 5-star player in his 4th year, etc. Here's some of the numbers on the defense for 08-09:
For calc efficiency I just used the nickel starters. Also note that I have Smith replacing Harrison as the nickelback/safety.
2008
DT: Taylor 4.50
Johnson 4.10
DE: Graham 4.79
Jamison 4.10
LB: Mouton 3.83
Ezeh 3.35
S: Brown 3.35
Stewart 3.08
CB: Trent 4.10
Harrison 4.00
Warren 3.50
Total: 3.88
In other words, our defense this year, talent-wise, was slightly above average (3.50) for a college football team.
2009:
DT: Martin 3.50
Campbell 3.13
DE: Graham 5.00
VanBergen 3.83
LB: Mouton 4.00
Ezeh 3.50
S: Brown 3.50
Williams 3.35
CB: Warren 3.83
Smith 3.50
Cissoko 3.50
Total: 3.70
So the 2009 defense, I project, will actually be worse than 2008, barring a surprising turnaround from one of those players.
Most importantly, we will suffer from the loss of Taylor, whose presence often allowed Martin to face single blocks, and of Will Johnson, who was a stalwart, experienced run-stopper. Martin and Campbell are awfully green, and thus easier to trick.
The secondary and linebacking will be only marginally improved, and will have a much tougher job this year with a significantly reduced defensive line.
I expect this defense to finish about 50-60th. The biggest difference will be from a vastly improved offense. 2009 will not be the offensive breakout year, but it will be a respectable offense, which is a huge upgrade from this year's embarrassment. I suspect they'll be able to take some of the heat off the defense.
Reasons I could be retarded:
-Freshman QBs committing turnovers
-Steve Brown suddenly switches on
-Martin becomes Alan Branch 2005
December 8th, 2008 at 11:56 AM ^
Why don't we just award the National Championship to the team with highest average star-rating every year?
December 8th, 2008 at 9:05 PM ^
I mean, it makes as much sense as an arbitrary 2-team playoff determined by how much Urban Meyer can wet his diaper.
December 8th, 2008 at 12:17 PM ^
I'm not sold on a lot of the D-line arguments. Here's why: every argument I've heard about the D-line has only discussed the starters and if the 2009 starters will be better or worse than those of 2008. You'd be hard pressed to convince anyone that after losing three starters who were all multi-year starters, our starting front 4 would be just as good. Let's even say they are.
The biggest drop of is in depth. Like most teams, Michigan rotates a lot on the D line, so having guys like Mike Martin and Ryan Van Bergen coming in to rest the starters was key. If you say that our starting 4 is a wash from last year, the next 2-4 guys coming in will certainly be a drop-off. That will require us to rest our d-line less frequently or play guys who really aren't ready to be out there. Also, pray there are no injuries, even small ones, to those 4 guys.
December 8th, 2008 at 12:24 PM ^
we lose too much to say 4 sure that we'll improve, but a month ago most of us figured BG was gone so i think our dline has a chance to be real good and the strength of our team if it wants. next year's depth there could be a problem, but you've gotta be excited by the depth we'll have on the dline a few years down the road.
December 8th, 2008 at 1:04 PM ^
We'll be returning 2 DT's with meaningful playing time (Sagesse and Martin) and 3 DE's with meaningful playing time (Graham, RVB, Banks). Given that we played 4 DE's and 4 DT's for most of the year, true Freshmen are going to need to step up - unless Adam Patterson materializes out of the ether to be a contributor.
December 8th, 2008 at 1:36 PM ^
I also think it's likely that we'll see some more three-man fronts next year. We are seriously lacking depth at DT, and it might behoove us to play some 3-3-5 or some 3-4 next year.
3-3-5
Graham, Martin, Van Bergen
Ezeh, Mouton, Fitzgerald
Cissoko, Warren, Brown, Williams, Turner
3-4
Graham, Martin, Van Bergen
Mouton, Ezeh, Fitzgerald, Evans
Cissoko, Warren, Brown, Williams
December 8th, 2008 at 1:40 PM ^
I agree with that. Especially at the beginning of the season while we get out freshman guys more acclimated to the college game. It would even be a good idea to switch to that just a couple times a game to rest guys instead of subbing in incapable players.
December 8th, 2008 at 1:44 PM ^
By the way, a Rivals article on Turner said that the coaches want to start him out at corner and see where it goes. It sounds like he'll become the new slot guy, a la Harrison and Williams.
I expect Williams to move to FS and Brown to become the SS. I don't think Brandon Smith is going to start next year, but he'll get some PT.
December 8th, 2008 at 4:28 PM ^
something about Turner just screams Marlin Jackson to me. What do you think?
December 8th, 2008 at 4:34 PM ^
I hadn't thought of that before, but I can see the comparison. Both are kind of 'tweeners between corner and safety. And I don't think Turner will ever be a big play guy (i.e. grab a ton of interceptions), but he'll be a solid tackler and be a solid - but unspectacular - cover guy. I was never extremely impressed with Jackson, partly because I was expecting the second coming of Charles Woodson. I thought he underachieved somewhat, but he had a good career.
I personally think Turner will end up at free safety before all is said and done.
December 8th, 2008 at 2:18 PM ^
might BG move to OLB a la Woodley? i'd be leery of moving BG inside a gap...
December 8th, 2008 at 2:23 PM ^
I doubt BG would move to OLB. They'd be taking away their best pass rusher and who would they put down at DE instead? Nah, I think he'd stay down. He's strong enough to maintain the point of attack now.
December 8th, 2008 at 2:47 PM ^
James Hall was, technically, a "Linebacker" and led the team in sacks for two years. I mean, I realize he was a DE, but they called him a linebacker for some reason.
December 9th, 2008 at 1:27 AM ^
Crable Too
December 8th, 2008 at 2:37 PM ^
woodley do the same thing at times in 06?
December 8th, 2008 at 3:03 PM ^
Woodley played OLB in '04 or '05 (whenever they tried to run the 3-4), but not in '06. That was English's first year as DC and they ran a 4-front almost exclusively.
December 8th, 2008 at 3:22 PM ^
i'm always off by a year.
December 8th, 2008 at 3:49 PM ^
queque the geometry lesson. a-gain.
December 8th, 2008 at 4:31 PM ^
Trent always gets beat. A TOLEDO reciever got 19-20 receptions against him. Picking on him alll day..
In general, trent always got beat...