Talked to Sam Webb about QBs...
I was sitting courtside last night for DeShawn's epic 20/20 performance (and the rest of the team's sleepwalk) and I ran into Sam Webb at halftime.
Talked to him a bit about the QB situation now and asked him who he thought we had the best shot at still getting. He said he considers Tajh Boyd highly unlikely based solely on the fact that he wants no part of playing in the kind of offense we run. (That made me question why he committed to WVU in the first place, but whatever).
He did say though that he thinks we have a serious shot at Denard Robinson. I've heard that he could possibly commit somewhere on the spot if he likes it enough. His official visit is set for the beginning of January and Sam said everything was riding on that.
Maybe we can bring him in, see how he does at QB in fall practice and eventually move him somewhere else so we can go for a highly-rated guy in next year's class? Just a thought.
P.S. Apparently I'm stupid, because I just realized that I neglected to ask him if he knew any additional nuggets of knowledge about the Stinky Beaver. Oh well.
December 23rd, 2008 at 11:33 AM ^
Robinson makes sense (for us) more than anyone else. If we got Boyd (unlikely) or Eugene Smith (somewhat more likely), it would put a serious crimp in our ability to land Devin Gardner, who most, I think, see as a superior prospect to Boyd, Smith, and Forcier. Also, it would help us to have QB's spread out - that way he could have 3 years of starting (if Threet wins the job) or 2 years of starting (if Forcier wins the job) - which would be more appealing.
Also, if Robinson didn't win the job next year, we could have him as depth for the season, and realistically transfer him to DB or WR with the arrival of Gardner.
December 23rd, 2008 at 5:07 PM ^
and I guess he did one of their combine events. his numbers look great compared to other M recruits who did the same.
December 23rd, 2008 at 7:33 PM ^
The beaver is long gone.
no chance of a turnaround
December 23rd, 2008 at 11:38 AM ^
He committed to WVU because Stewart said he wants to pass more. I talked to Devin Gardner the other day, and he was optimistic about Beaver leaving, joking about it too.
December 23rd, 2008 at 11:43 AM ^
Except for the fact that Bill Stewart can't coach his way out of his own tunnel. Maybe Denard will make a good commitment decision this time around!
December 23rd, 2008 at 11:49 AM ^
denard = db
December 23rd, 2008 at 12:06 PM ^
Denard Robinson is a VERY raw quarterback prospect, but he does have some tools to work with. He has decent arm strength and some semblance of mechanics, although they're very inconsistent. I don't think he's a guy who could come in and start as a freshman over Threet or Forcier, but he is a guy who could play some QB in two or three years.
December 23rd, 2008 at 5:08 PM ^
know all this about his mechanics?
December 24th, 2008 at 4:27 AM ^
I've seen a couple highlight videos of him throwing the ball.
(For those who will undoubtedly criticize me for judging from a couple short videos, I realize watching a couple highlight videos doesn't make me an expert on the kid. Let's move on.)
I've studied quarterback mechanics to a certain extent. I'm not anything close to an expert, but I've been to coaching clinics, worked with my team's quarterbacks at times, read some articles, and watched an instructional video or two. There are probably people on this board who know more about throwing mechanics than I do, but I think they'll all agree that Robinson has considerable work to do (although that's pretty common for HS quarterbacks). Like I said, though, he's got potential.
December 24th, 2008 at 8:25 PM ^
in terms of amateur credit.
Any links though? That's more what I meant. Little defensive there, Mag?
December 25th, 2008 at 12:05 AM ^
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoZiQtlTauc
There's a free video on Youtube. It's not great quality, though.
Considering the fact that people jump on me for making judgments based on highlight videos, I feel like I have to present two or three caveats before each opinion I offer. It's like the fine print on a contract that you think is common sense and therefore unnecessary, but then somebody lacking common sense comes along and gives you shit because you didn't include the fine print but then it's too late to edit the fine print into the contract.
December 25th, 2008 at 4:03 PM ^
aside from a number of bad HS habits that he can get away with thanks to his athleticism, I liked his potential. Throws with authority, seems to really be able to chuck it. He needs to work on getting over his front side consistently, as he sometimes throws off his back foot. But I'm encouraged.
December 23rd, 2008 at 12:01 PM ^
I'd feel much better if we were able to land Eugene Smith or Tajh Boyd in this year's class rather than hoping and praying that we can bring in Devin Gardner in '10. Banking on Gardner coming in next year because Beaver decommitted is a huge gamble. I wouldn't care one bit if a commit from Smith or Boyd in this recruiting class costs us Gardner in next year's class.
December 23rd, 2008 at 12:08 PM ^
I agree, but I don't think it's an either/or situation. The coaches aren't going to give up on 2009 QB recruiting and concentrate on Gardner. They're going to try to get an '09 quarterback and then turn their attention to Gardner.
December 23rd, 2008 at 12:37 PM ^
one way or another (if we kept Beaver or got Boyd/Smith) it'd end up like this: Everyone is "happy to compete, beacause (they're) all competitors." Then next year, or this year after the loser is red-shirted, someone asks for a transfer, and in the mean time we lose hope for the '10 class because Gardner/whoever has moved on away from our 2 '09 deep QB position.
I also think it'd cause a shitstorm of controversy. Everyone was already so polarized about Tate, that if RR tried to use both QB's he get hammered. Trying to accomodate 2 in one class won't work here, we're not that established yet. We'd be better with a second-tier guy who has potential elsewhere, and leave the QB job to the Threet/Tate battle.
December 23rd, 2008 at 12:39 PM ^
I think you have that wrong. We're not established and thus we have all the room in the world for an open competition. It's after we become established that a 2 deep class becomes impossible.
December 23rd, 2008 at 12:42 PM ^
Bingo.
December 23rd, 2008 at 12:43 PM ^
Pete Carroll laughs at your concept of "depth charts".
December 23rd, 2008 at 12:47 PM ^
He's the only one that can laugh, although, Stanford certainly took advantage of a USC squad ravaged by injuries in '07. Even the mighty Trojans couldn't overcome losing multiple offensive linemen and their starting quarterback for that game.
December 23rd, 2008 at 12:48 PM ^
Even when we win our back to back to back to back national championships in a few years, we'll never be able to stockpile like USC does. The natural advantages they have are just too much to compete with.
December 23rd, 2008 at 4:43 PM ^
they're not ALL natural...
December 23rd, 2008 at 7:14 PM ^
How close were you able to inspect them?
December 23rd, 2008 at 12:42 PM ^
The successful dual-use QB programs I remember seeing (like Florida or LSU) had offenses that were already running liek clockwork and allowed for maximizing each QB's best abilities.
I agree that us not being established leaves alot of desire out there for prospects, to want to come compete for the job, since it's "so open for the taking"; however, once the battle is decided (starter named) I think it gets ugly. I don't think we're sound enough on "O" yet to bounce back and forth. Right now, in my opinion, we need consistency more than anything.
December 23rd, 2008 at 12:50 PM ^
I'd be thrilled if we somehow landed Denard Robinson, though I think it's unlikely. Freak athlete, by all accounts, and just look at the offers list.
December 23rd, 2008 at 1:21 PM ^
and I think this will make him more likely to commit. But Sam kept talking about how Michigan was going after a more 'athlete' player who had experience at QB and could play the part but was also fully capable at another position, like DB. Obviously Denard Robinson fits that, but doesn't that also sound like Thomas Gordon? Couldn't he be a backup QB if it's necessary?
December 23rd, 2008 at 1:24 PM ^
...no. Thomas Gordon will never even get a shot at QB. We need safeties, and he's not a college-level QB, and it's very rare that a player can split time between offense and defense, let alone quarterback and defense.
December 23rd, 2008 at 1:37 PM ^
It sounds like Robinson and Travante Stallworth, because that's who it is.
December 23rd, 2008 at 1:42 PM ^
It sounds like Rodriguez is looking for an athlete and a passer in this class... it's been suggested before, but maybe he's looking to run a two QB system. We know he loves innovation and the so called "Suggs offense" Cam Cameron invented this year for the Ravens certainly fits the bill. Maybe Rodriguez is intrigued?
December 23rd, 2008 at 1:47 PM ^
I sincerely doubt it.
December 23rd, 2008 at 1:55 PM ^
The two quarterback system has been tried repeatedly and usually does not work. On top of that, Rodriguez has found success using one quarterback in the past. Innovation often comes from below - coaches/teams with less talent try new things to even the playing field or use the element of surprise. Established coaches and teams have already figured out how to win.
Pete Carroll isn't going to come up with some newfangled offense.
Urban Meyer was an innovator and that's what got him to where he is.
Rodriguez has the coaching chops and the talent at Michigan (or the talent is incoming) to run a successful offense the way he's run it in the past. He doesn't need to take a giant leap from where he is to make an impact.
December 23rd, 2008 at 2:02 PM ^
I think it's more of a depth thing, just in case, ala Pat White injury for the Pitt game.
December 23rd, 2008 at 5:10 PM ^
because of selection bias. if there was one obviously superior QB, you wouldn't be in a 2 QB system.
December 23rd, 2008 at 3:51 PM ^
Did you see the kid's highlights? Robinson is by no means a huge concession in terms of passing ability. He may be an "athlete" but he can certainly throw the ball well.
December 24th, 2008 at 8:27 AM ^
one of robinson's games was televised a few weeks ago. i watched it not knowing who he was. he's not a D-I qb, imo
nice athlete, but small (5'10 170 if i'm guessing) and not much at throwing
December 28th, 2008 at 7:26 AM ^
On Ray Cotton? haven't heard much about him did he re commit to AU?