March 16th, 2010 at 10:23 AM ^

Good "filler" for the average fan to catch-up on UM football after 4 months off.

Pretty obvious questions for us, however. The D. Gardner question would be my #6 considering that it's Tate's to lose and how important, IMO, it is for Garnder to redshirt and be available for 2 years post-Tate.

My other top-5 question would be OL... specifically the
1) health of Molk; 2) Who is the RG opposite Schilling; and, 3) is Lewan a starter at Tackle. If not, we are filling the RT spot with "proven" back-ups Huyge and/or Dorrestein.

But then again, I'm no "journalist" like Birkett. So who am I to question anything he says about UM football.


March 16th, 2010 at 10:25 AM ^

His issue was just the broken foot, right? Much better that than a tendon or ligament problem, so I'm sure he'll be fine for spring, and definitely for the fall. He is hige though, with him playing every game we would have been in a bowl last year,IMO.


March 16th, 2010 at 10:28 AM ^

Woolfolk was one of the few component players not on th DL last year. He was able to play saftey and corner as well. I can't believe you would say he didn't make plays.

Smitty D

March 16th, 2010 at 11:43 AM ^

the hell that name is, when Michigan wins 8 or 9 games next year he will be the guy on his couch talking to his buddies about Woolfolk. "Man guys did you see that pick Woolfolk just had geez he is the man I always liked this kid and knew he was a stud"

exmtroj= Troll


March 16th, 2010 at 2:17 PM ^

If he plays well, I'll suck it up and admit I was wrong, and a big jackass. Somehow I just don't think it's going to work out, being a track star/fast doesn't always convert to being a good DB. And I've been a member here longer than you, so troll my ass. Also, 8 or 9 wins? That's an improvement, but is that what Michigan fans are supposed to be extremely fired up about now? I'd be sorely disappointed with anything less, especially with the firepower other Big Ten teams have lost.