2007 TSUN News

[Napoleonbuck]

I think Napoleon was being a bit sarcastic. Michigan fans were saying how James Jackson wasn't a loss because of all the slot players they already had and then they turn around and get ANOTHER one.

At least that is how I read it.

Yep. Michigan fans don't need any more slot receivers was what they were saying after Jackson verballed to us. Since then they've picked up a wide receiver and yet another slot.

 

[brutus2002]

^It doesn't matter because their fanbase as a whole believes he wasn't a loss. As I mentioned above he was a greater loss in two other areas. Michigan losing him to OSU will hurt them in different ways in the future. You cannot continue to lose your states top talent to you two biggest rivals (MSU and OSU). Especially without a fight. They are striking out in PA,OH, MI, and Ill...they have started to recruit Mississippi and Maryland hard for some reason. Own your region and cheery pick others...hes cherry picking and neglecting the midwest...big mistake.

 

[GrizzlyBuck]

I don't think you guys understand the incredible strategy that rr is employing when it comes to recruiting. We know that JT's strategy is to recruit speed, big speed, and power. rr is doing the same thing, but after watching the Buckeyes struggle against speed rushers in the past couple of NC games, he has reconfigured what he considers big speed, anyone over 180lbs is considered big speed and will be converted to DE, TE, LB and if they really fill out and get over 200lbs they will be given a shot at OL or DT.

I think we Buckeye fans are looking at some lean times ahead (pun intended)

 

[TheIronColonel]

I'm glad I'm not the only one who's wondering how Michigan will field an offensive line. They're recruiting some decent looking skill guys, but unless they pick up the slack on recruiting big uglies, their offensive line will be weaker than a wet paper towel (and not Brawny, either).

 

[Oh8ch]

While it would be naive to suggest the "offer lists" from recruiting services is a direct reflection of a school's recruiting strategy it is the best we have to go on.

That said, per Scout UM has offered two DE's in this class - both 4 stars and both committed elsewhere (Fellows is one).

They have offered 5 DTs - all 4 star or better. Campbell committed to UM when Carr was still coaching. One of the others is going to Alabama. The other three include extreme long shot Corey Adams, Josh Boyd (who hails from Miss and lists Miss St as his leader), and Antwan Landry (who is from Miami and lists Miami as his leader).

Of course, UM landed one DL last year and two the year before - so maybe with Campbell they are set or perhaps plan to convert some of their surplus OL.

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

While it would be naive to suggest the "offer lists" from recruiting services is a direct reflection of a school's recruiting strategy it is the best we have to go on.

That said, per Scout UM has offered two DE's in this class - both 4 stars and both committed elsewhere (Fellows is one).

They have offered 5 DTs - all 4 star or better. Campbell committed to UM when Carr was still coaching. One of the others is going to Alabama. The other three include extreme long shot Corey Adams, Josh Boyd (who hails from Miss and lists Miss St as his leader), and Antwan Landry (who is from Miami and lists Miami as his leader).

Of course, UM landed one DL last year and two the year before - so maybe with Campbell they are set or perhaps plan to convert some of their surplus OL.

Just so I'm clear, can I assume this report is BPs official position?

Assuming so, would you care to explain how Illinois was left out of this post?

 

[shetuck]

...Assuming so, would you care to explain how Illinois was left out of this post?

Typical of the rampant inaccuracy in BP's recruiting reports...

That, coupled with the fact that Illinois actually only counts as less than 1/2 of a program; hence, sometimes (depending on academic standards and all) when these counts are rounded to the nearest whole number, Illinois gets rounded down. It's unfortunate, but that's the reality of recruiting these days with the 85 scholarship limit and all...

 

[Oh8ch]

Assuming so, would you care to explain how Illinois was left out of this post?

My apologies. When I mentioned Fellows I should have pointed out that he was a strong Illinois lean.

 

[HailToMichigan]

Welcome to the Big-10, pipsqueak. :)

Or: Big Ten, welcome to SEC SPEED.

As far as dinky little wicked fast slot/RB types, there's actually only three, though I'm sure official offers were extended to more: Gallon, Jones, and Toussaint. Turner is sometimes listed as ATH which can be confusing, but make no mistakes - he's a CB. McNeal is 6'2", tall enough to play outside and too lanky for RB.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who's wondering how Michigan will field an offensive line. They're recruiting some decent looking skill guys, but unless they pick up the slack on recruiting big uglies, their offensive line will be weaker than a wet paper towel (and not Brawny, either).

Probably going to be a small class of offensive linemen. There will be 18 O-linemen in camp this fall, and absolutely none of them run out of eligibility after this year. In other words barring injury or one of them leaving for the draft (unlikely) or transferring, the same 18 that come to camp in '08 will be there in '09 as well - plus, assuming nobody comes rolling in with any of that snake oil, Campbell. Having picked up a class of 6 of them last year, which is unusually big, there isn't a need for quantity, nor is there room.

 

[sandgk]

HTM - serious questions - 18 sounds like a big number, what about quality.

Are you satisfied with the quality of the O-line you have this year?

Follow-up.

With no new O-line recruits (should that happen) would you be happy with the quality of the O-line going forward, and why?

 

[HailToMichigan]

HTM - serious questions - 18 sounds like a big number, what about quality.

Are you satisfied with the quality of the O-line you have this year?

Follow-up.

With no new O-line recruits (should that happen) would you be happy with the quality of the O-line going forward, and why?

1st question: No. Some of the most talented of the 18 are incoming freshmen (I'm hoping for big things out of O'Neill and Barnum.) It can't be helped much, it wasn't left in good shape to begin with, whether or not anyone had left.

2nd question: Jury's out on that one without getting to see how they do in '08.

There's something of a theory that Brian at MGoBlog posted that says Andy Moeller was a shitty fucking offensive line coach, only had a job because he was Gary's son, and Greg Frey, basically by not being Andy Moeller, will be a great improvement. And thus we should see an improvement in the play of guys like former five-star Schilling and former four-stars Zirbel, Moosman, etc.

It's kind of a Kool-Aidy theory but I'll sip - it's not without evidence. Brian rightly points out that Michigan used to be an offensive lineman factory (Hutchinson, Backus, Runyan, and quite a number of others that were drafted in various rounds.) Once 2002 rolled around and Moeller was hired, that essentially dried up, Jake Long and David Baas being the only notables, and three-year starters that anchored the line, like Adam Stenavich and Matt Lentz, now going undrafted. Also, Moeller ended up with pretty low on the totem pole type job as an assistant to an assistant.

So. Better coaching? Hopefully. Give them a couple years with an O-line coach who's probably better and an S&C coach who's definitely better (as much as it's kind of a joke, it's still true) and I think the line will end up back in good shape, long term, especially if Campbell sticks around.

 

[Napoleonbuck]

What about your defensive line? That seems like the far bigger concern for Michigan right now(or at least it should be).

 

[HailToMichigan]

What about your defensive line? That seems like the far bigger concern for Michigan right now(or at least it should be).

Right now, no. The top four of Jamison and Graham on the ends and Taylor and Johnson in the middle is a good one. It's thin after that though....Ryan Van Bergen, who I think redshirted last year, is the only other one worth getting excited over.

It's the future that doesn't bode as well. That's where D-line flip-flops with O-line as the primary concern. Mike Martin was our pickup in '08, and he's a good one, but he's the only one, and he's a DT where there actually is already some depth. (Some of the reserves got a little PT in '07 so there's a little experience, at least.) DE? Well, there's Van Bergen and that's about it. There's some actual players with actual names listed on the roster and that's the best I can say. The silver lining is that you can make up for a crappy D-line much better than you can make up for a crappy O-line and you can make up for crappy DEs more than you can make up for crappy DTs.

 

[sandgk]

Sounds like a bunch of crap you've got to make up for there :)

Seriously though, solid answers to the questions HTM - though (surprise, suprise) I don't buy the Kool-Aid influenced dramatic improvement argument on the O-line.

[sarcasm](Even if Barwis is a demi-god of non-steroid influenced conditioning)[/sarcasm]

 

[brutus2002]

Are you guys planning to give Graham and Jamison some rest???? You guys cannot think that those guys are gonna play every down...right. What player of any experience is behind them?

Do you have 18 scholarship OL or is that including walk-ons. Most teams have around 15 scholarship OL...