So...3 spots left?

Submitted by cypress on January 24th, 2011 at 10:47 AM
I'm likely getting ahead of myself, but just for argument sake I'll bring up this point. It appears we are strongly in the lead for Bryant, Clark and Willingham. With 14 commits right now, that would bring us to 17..3 left to give. On the board as possibilities: Fisher, Barnett, Rawls, McClure, Raven and a couple longshots like Alexander and Cooper. This list also doesn't include a QB if we somehow flip one, or any other surprise names that may pop up. It will be very interesting to see how we handle finishing out this class and what we do if a lot of guys want to commit. Not taking Lucien or Flowers appears to make sense, but hopefully we don't run out of room with some bigger targets still on the board. If we get those 3, I'd hope to get Fisher, Barnett and Cooper. Those would be the 3 positions of need and would be an excellent finish. Should be exciting..any guesses on how we'll finish?



January 24th, 2011 at 10:55 AM ^

I disagree.

Worst case scenario (in my mind) is the following: We sign 2 more guys (one of the three the OP mentions, and Rawls), but Countess heads to PSU (again, this is WORST case). 

That'd leave us with a class of 15, likely a couple spots ahead of where we are in the recruiting rankings (assume that the other player we get is a 4-star defensive player).  In those 15 players, only 3 are going to play offense (Rawls, Hayes, Posada).  We will have taken 15 in a class of 20. 

You're going to tell me people on this board won't hit the panic button if the above situation happens? 

(I'd give the above about a 5-10% chance of happening, so it's not likely, but I do feel it would result in mass panic)


January 24th, 2011 at 11:04 AM ^

I'm not panicking, but that would indeed be a reverse RichRod.  We took a largely defensive class last year, so picking up only three offensive recruits would not be good.  I don't expect this to happen at all, but it's the kind of thing that would inspire a light version of "A Decimated Offense" to be written.


January 24th, 2011 at 11:07 AM ^


i'll take an ok recruiting class out of this one but I'm really suprised michigan didn't learn the first time they recruited on side of the ball heavily and not the other. It will have negative effects in 3 years. (cough cough our D this year) ( i know GERG was the detinator of all the NUKs by Jhackney but they were also all young and inexperienced on that side of the ball) I would like to see our class finish strong and mostly on the offensive side. Maybe a DT in there (cooper please). But next year is the year I'm looking forward to. We need to see if hoke can generate the interest back into Michigan that use to be there. I would like another 2002/ 2003.  


January 24th, 2011 at 11:16 AM ^

I don't think recruiting one side of the ball more heavily will have as big of an impact in 3 years as some think. For the first time in what seems like forever most of these guys will actually REDSHIRT. I know, can't believe it either. The fact that they will lessens the impact felt by recruiting because most classes will actually start to overlap one another.

By this I mean our elite recruits who play early will be Sophomores or Juniors playing with the previous class on the field as redshirt Sophmores and Juniors. These in coming recruits will actually have time to develop, so we don't have to hit a home run right away with each one. So thanks RR for leaving behind some talent.

turd ferguson

January 24th, 2011 at 2:22 PM ^

I'm probably wrong about this, so please correct me, but wouldn't this make things worse?  If we didn't redshirt many kids from last year's offensive class and we do redshirt kids from this group (and next year's group), that will be two years during which we'll have essentially no seniors.  Am I missing something?


January 24th, 2011 at 11:29 AM ^

Thanks, Philbert.  I think I was able to comprehend everything you mentioned above.

I agree with you - if we only have 3 (or even 4 for that matter) offensive recruits in this class, there should be an issue 3-4 years down the road on offense. 

Using this site's "Michigan Depth Chart by Class" I see the following issues that our 2011 recruiting class will cause in 2014/2015:

  • QBs: Only if injuries happen.  I fully trust that Devin will develop into a QB we'd love to have starting for us for two seasons, and that Denard is able to run a pro-style offense at 90% of what he was doing last year (albeit with a big shift from rushing yards to passing yards, like 2006 Troy Smith).
  • RBs: None.  We have Hayes and probably Rawls in this class.  Will have a Fr/So/Jr/Sr at RB in 2011. 
  • WRs: Minor issues.  I don't know the RS status of some of these guys, but it seems like we're banking on Jackson/Robinson/Williamson to be our guys in four years, given that Stokes will have moved on (and despite his playing time, he is anything but a sure bet).  Hopefully one (or two) of the three mentioned above step up, but I have my doubts.  I think Gallon and Dileo (unless he's Steve Breaston 2.0) are the two most likely transfers on the team right now.
  • TEs:  Potential issue.  I will wait to see how Hoke wants to use these guys before reaching panic level.  If he uses them much like RR (aka not at all), then there are no worries.  If he uses them like Carr did Joppru, then I think we'll have a 4 or 5 star TE here in a couple of years, while Koger/Ricardo do the damn thing until he is ready.
  • OTs: Not very worried.  Lewan has that spot locked down for the next 2-3 years (depending on if he goes pro early or not), Huyge can start next year, and Schofield has shown competence thus far.  If we don't get Jake Fisher, we can replace him with a 4-star in the 2012 class.
  • OGs: I think there is a major issue here.  3 Juniors in 2011, and then... nothing.  Let's put it this way, if you were recruiting your NCAA dynasty, you'd be targeting the hell out of Guards right now.  Yes, Miller/Pace/Khoury could move over from Center, or a Tackle could move over, but after next season we will have 10 offensive linemen if Fisher commits.  That's pretty freaking low if you ask me, and could create a potential issue down the road. 

If I were Hoke, and I had ~16 scholarships for next season, 10 of those would go to the offense.  1 QB, 1 RB, 1 FB, 2 WR (both outside), 1 TE, and 4 OL.

  • The QB will give us 3, assuming we don't get one here late.
  • RB replaces Shaw
  • FB replaces McColgan (or whoever is used, if they are used)
  • We thin our WR numbers by a net 2 (lose Hemingway/Odoms/Stonum/Grady)
  • TE replaces Koger
  • OL boosts numbers by 2 (lose Molk and Huyge)

So, net/net the offensive player numbers stay the same, but we beef up the Oline numbers while thinning out the WRs.  I would probably support an additional offensive recruit (so 11 out of 16) if the coaches felt we needed it. 


January 24th, 2011 at 11:40 AM ^

Nice post with some solid information and predictions. The problem with us taking that many offensive guys next year is that the 2012 class is loaded with defensive talent in both Michigan and Ohio. I agree we need some more skill postion players on offense, but I think you have to take the best available football player as long as you have a capable bodies at each position. 


January 24th, 2011 at 11:42 AM ^

Thanks for putting this together.  It's a lot of work, could be a thread upon itself.  Let's use your 16 schollie's, there is a lot of defensive talent in Mich and Ohio and it will be interesting who we get.  I am not sure we need a RB next year, if we get Rawls this year.  We do need a FB or TE/FB hybrid.  We definitely needs some guards and absolutely need a QB.


January 24th, 2011 at 12:01 PM ^

Why exactly do you think he's undersized?  He's listed at 6'3", 237 on Rivals.  The other services list his weight a little lower, but most of those are also pretty old, and kids this age put on weight pretty quickly.  I'd be surprised if he showed up to Ann Arbor less than 235, and he could be over 240.

For a freshman DE, that's not undersized at all.  It's not an instant playmaker, but it's bigger than Roh was when he showed up, and he started from day one. 

That said, I'm not against trying him on offense as a tight end or H-back, but not because he's undersized. 


January 24th, 2011 at 12:06 PM ^

He is far from being a little guy but he is not a monster either. Just a shot in the dark based on watching a little film on the kid is all. He is athletic and pretty physical at the point of attack and think he may fit this spot pretty well is more my point. At his current size you could put a few more pounds on him and he would be ideal for this position which is also very important in this offense. I think this kid has a ton of potential FWIW.


January 24th, 2011 at 11:57 AM ^

We're a week away from faxes across the country blowing up with LOIs.  I'll wait until we see what happens with our recruits this year before going further. 

But anyway you cut it, we're going to need to gain OL bodies in this class.  In fact, I'd argue that based on our recent string of CB commits, that Fisher is more important to us now than a guy like Raven or McClure.  Or perhaps even Countess (not saying that, but it's a valid argument either way). 


January 24th, 2011 at 12:04 PM ^

Assuming Bryant is ours (which, like, I though Frost and Zettel were ours too), I agree that Fisher, or a solid replacement OT, is more important than an additional CB.  We have young DBs, we have DBs in this class already, I'd like more good corners, but OL is thin.

If we only get Bryant, Posada and Miller at OL in this class, we need 4 or 5 for sure in the next class.


January 24th, 2011 at 12:25 PM ^


Very nicely put together. I have checked out our depth chart and i agree with everything completely. I've also been a big believer of not rebuilding but reloading. What i mean by that and you kind of covered it with the redshirts, was that when our seniors graduate i would rather have a Jr or a Soph filling in than a Freshman stepping into a position that he isn't ready for. i know this isn't really possible with the player leaving and one sided recruiting over the last 4 to 5 years but that would be nice. That team down south is a perfect example of what im talking about. they always have someone to fill in after one guy graduates. I hope that will be out future.


January 24th, 2011 at 10:54 AM ^

Has anyone left the program due to the coaching change?  Other than Tate I can't think of anyone.  If someone did that could free up another scholarship.  As long as they're not a valuable assest to the program at this time.


January 24th, 2011 at 11:16 AM ^

Tate actually was excited to stay once he heard Hoke was here!  Either way, wish him the best, but like RR would always say, we need to focus on "who" plays for Michigan! 

Our team will improve, and next year we will see much better results in recruiting.  However, I feel this year, we are walking away with some talented guys.  Also, let's not forget...we still have some time left to improve. 

I must say, pretty impressive to get 3 recruits to commit on your first weekend host.  Well played Hoke.


January 24th, 2011 at 10:54 AM ^

With Forcier's departure, I believe we have 21 slots.

I don't think Barnett is coming to MI.

My guesses for the other spots are Rawls, Fisher, Cooper, and a QB.  I'd like to get Raven and/or McClure, but I think they're longshots.


January 24th, 2011 at 11:01 AM ^

just kidding...i read somewhere that Tom Savage was denied permission to speak to Michigan in regards to a transfer. woulf he even an option? he was a pretty good ball player out of HS and was going well at Rutgers before he got hurt. anyone hear anything on this?


January 24th, 2011 at 11:44 AM ^

I do not believe that Heitzman is being brought in as a LB.  And if Beyer and Clark are both LBs, and we get Willingham, that would give us 5 linebackers in this class, 1 DE (assuming Rock is a DT) and no TE.  If we don't sign a TE in this class, I would hope one of Heitzman, Clark or Beyer would move to TE.  My preference, in order, would be Beyer, Clark, then Heitzman.

I've been saying since the FNL segments that Beyer would make a good TE.