Who is Michigan's most indispensable player?

Submitted by Moleskyn on

ESPN just posted an article listing out the five most indispensable players in the Big Ten. For Michigan, they listed Mike McCray:

Michigan LB Mike McCray: The lone returning starter from a loaded defense, McCray is responsible for helping a young and talented pack of players around him get used to college football on the fly. The redshirt senior battled injuries through most of his career before finding his groove with 76 tackles and 4.5 sacks last season. He said after Michigan's spring game that his confidence was at “an all-time high” and that he thinks the whole unit can be faster that it was a year ago. When the Wolverines get up to full speed, it will largely be McCray’s job to keep them all running in the right direction.

While I can see their reasoning, I am not sure I entirely agree; if McCray gets hurt, we have some non-true freshman backups behind him. With the lack of depth on the d-line, I think any one of Hurst, Mone, or Gary are more indispenable to the team.

What do the rest of you think?

 

Ali G Bomaye

May 8th, 2017 at 9:54 AM ^

I think it's probably Mason Cole. Without him, the entire OL is an enormous question mark, and we probably end up starting two or more guys who have gotten virtually no playing time.

Although another interesting answer is one of Long and Hill at CB. Unless Keith Washington's spring game breakthrough was for real, we need both Long and Hill to be at least adequate at CB.

McCray is great, but we have options to replace him, especially since Don Brown really only uses two pure LBs on most downs.

M Ascending

May 8th, 2017 at 11:34 AM ^

Brandon Peters.  When speight "spits the bit" as he is wont to do and fails to improve in his second season at the helm, we are going to need Peters to take over and elevate the team's performance.  Sorry, but I just don't have confidence that Speight can take it to the next level, and I also believe that Harbaugh's concept of meritocracy will continue in force, leading eventually to Peters as the starter.  He will need to perform at a very high level for a RS Freshman.

2Blue4You

May 8th, 2017 at 9:55 AM ^

Not sure the network formerly known as The Worldwide Leader has the chops to look beyond returning starters.

I would agree with the OP.

Everyone Murders

May 8th, 2017 at 10:03 AM ^

I don't really have a strong counterargument against McCray.  He'll be running the defense on the field, and even though there is a two-deep, that "QB of the defense" role is an important one.

Agreed, though, that Mason Cole would also be a critical loss.  We've got some thin spots on the two-deep, and while our starting OL looks to be quite good, depth (except at Center, which looks just fine) is a concern.

TrueBlue2003

May 8th, 2017 at 2:03 PM ^

but ILB just isn't nearly as high leverage a position as linemen, QB and even CB.  If the Dline is as good as it should be (and even close to as good as it was last year), he might not even have a whole lot coming his way.  We could hide his backup at least somewhat.

But if we lose Cole, hooooo boy, there could be pain coming off the edge every single play.  Could throw off the entire offense.  There's a reason it's become the 2nd most important position on the field in the eyes of NFL front offices.  And we have no capable backup.  So the answer here has to be Cole.

Leaders And Best

May 8th, 2017 at 10:07 AM ^

Surprised no one has mentioned Maurice Hurst. We have no DT depth, and he is a potential 1st round pick. Bryan Mone and Michael Dwumfour both have injury histories, and we were playing walkons at second string during spring practice.

MotownGoBlue

May 8th, 2017 at 11:50 AM ^

Hurst, Mone, Solomon, Hudson, Dwumfour, Marshall (moved inside) Irving-Bey, Paea (Gary, Ron Johnson, and Jeter could even play inside). I strongly doubt it comes down to walkons, though we've had a couple of those work out on the lines in recent years. With the solid depth, talent, and coaching/developing by Mattison, the DLine (albeit the depth is younger and less experienced) should be the least of our concerns.

TrueBlue2003

May 8th, 2017 at 2:33 PM ^

I'd say the least concerning position group is RB, with not much concern about TE and QB (at least in terms of how much dropoff there would be to the backup if a starter were injured).  DL is definitely a concern because of the need for so much depth. You're listing a lot of true freshmen and guys that haven't played as "depth" here and those are tough to count on.

I would say Mo Hurst and Gary are probably 2a and 2b after Cole in terms of indispensibility, if that's a word.

TrueBlue2003

May 8th, 2017 at 3:27 PM ^

great last year, so I'm not sure we've seen enough to think there would be a big dropoff if we had to start Kugler/Ruiz/Spanellis there.  I don't think he'd be on this list but remove him, and I agree with your top 4 with Hurst and Gary being about the same.

maize-blue

May 8th, 2017 at 10:07 AM ^

Any loss on the first string D line is going to be a very big set back. Particularly one of the DT's. They really need true freshman to step up.

EastCoast Esq.

May 8th, 2017 at 10:17 AM ^

Outside-the-box pick: Quinn Nordin

Without a decent kicker, punts, kick-offs, and extra points are all an adventure. And forget about field goals over 30 yards.

He may not be proven yet, but I'd hate to be entering this season with Ryan Tice as our only true option.

jabberwock

May 8th, 2017 at 10:28 AM ^

I think it's 100% spot on.

The D line has plenty of players.  So what if we lose 1 of our world-wtrecking D linemen, we put a semi-servicable back-up or a talented frosh in and compensate.
Last years D spoled everybody.

If you can't kick it changes the whole game and severely lmits your offensive optiuons.

CarrIsMyHomeboy

May 8th, 2017 at 10:18 AM ^

I think the starting DL is, sure, way more proven-as-talented than the starting OL, but also *way* further beyond the 2nd DL than the 1st OL is beyond its 2nd line. That thinness makes my answer: "any starting DL" And since Hurst and Gary are our tops, I'll say them, in that order.

Hard-Baughlls

May 8th, 2017 at 10:21 AM ^

as an individual, as he will quarterback a young defense.

While each of Mone, Hurst, and Gary are just as indespensible, they each get only 1/3 the value of McCray since it's a single position group and the thinking is maybe the remaining 2 could make up for some of that which is lost when losing 1.

Mason Cole is the best and most versatile player returning on our O-line that has been bad to average over the past couple years - so IMO he gets the nod, as the whole thing could go to dumpster fire if we lose him.

IMO

1) Mason Cole

2) McCray

3) Any of the Mone, Hurst, Gary trio

Esterhaus

May 8th, 2017 at 10:22 AM ^

 

We're vulnerable in terms of depth at several positions. Some of you listed multiple players, including Tyree, and the plural  illustrates the problem. I really don't see how we can be effective on offense without Mason Cole playing at 90% or better. So Mason 'tis.

BlueKoj

May 8th, 2017 at 10:43 AM ^

I get the QB of the defense and only returning starter thing for McCray, but I'd have to say, the QB of The Team is more important. Although, Harbaugh's 2nd (and maybe 3rd) best QBs could win 10-games this year, I think the starter needs to be better than Rudock and Speight were the last two years.

QB and OL have been the barriers to championships under Harbaugh so it's either Cole or the winner of Speight/Peters. That assumes the winner will be a difference maker who can elevate the team (and its young WRs/TEs) and is capable of winning games against the best competition.

TrueBlue2003

May 8th, 2017 at 4:15 PM ^

is the not most important position on the field.  Of course that's QB on a football team in general.  The question here is which is the most indispensible player on Michigan within context of the rest of the roster.  In other words, which player's loss, if he went down with an injury and missed the season, would cause the largest increase in expected losses for the team?

Since Speight/Peters are so (supposedly/allegedly) close, they can't be the answer here.  If one went down, we might just shrug and say, ok, no QB controversy, here we go (although I think Speight could be further ahead and thus, could be higher on this list than most are giving him credit for).

If Cole went down with an injury, there would rightfully be outright panic around here.  He's the answer, probably followed by the DL starters in order of talent because the dropoff to the next guy is so large.

Wolfman

May 8th, 2017 at 5:13 PM ^

It has to be Mason Cole for obvious reasons.  I could buy into the Nordin claim a bit if he had every kicked a collegiate extra point or FG. If he is as good as Brian suggests, than that may be true. That would suggest our danger pt for opposing defenses would be roughly the 43-44 yard line, a huge, huge advantage. I've seen Cole though, now for multiple years. I've yet to see Nordin. Now the reasoning behind Peters and Speight is logical as well, but I've yet to see Peters make a play at this level, and you are all free to feel M's offense would not skip a beat if Peters were inserted tomorrow. I hope that's true, simply because it would indicated he's far, far ahead of expectations at this point. Again......we've seen nothing.