Tyjon Lindsey DeCommit

[SinCityBlue]

Speculation is that the relationship between him and Tate Martell (OSU Commit) has taken a bad turn. I’m biased being a Vegas guy but I would really love to have him even if it means we take 5 WRs in this class. He’s a slot type and I know we landed a bunch of those last year, but I’ve seen him play several times over the years….he’s dynamic…a playmaker

[INTJohn]

No.
We need OL’s:
Last 10 years Michigan has had 31 scholarship OL’s
Clemson has had 35
OSU has had 36

ALABAMA………………46
If Michigan is going to compete we need OL’s.
End of it.
INTJohn

[Lanknows]

The Gospel of the Trenches must be heard and spread across the lands. Thank you INT John.

The OL undid Hoke, has handicapped Harbaugh, and was largely responsible for the 3-9 season that started Rodriguez off on the wrong foot with so many.

There is no answer but to attack the position with numbers. Nothing against Linsey – I think Michigan really wants to add one more WR be it Collins, Martin or someone else – but I agree that the OL should be the focus.

And way to back up the point with some data!

[SinCityBlue]

Yep…totally understand and agree. We need the sheer numbers on the OL due to many reasons. I don’t know how long it took INT to look up 10 years of OL roster data but that was pretty cool too. I have the man crush on this guy because I think he’s more of an alpha than Tate Martell. Like the Bubba Bolden on offense, he WANTS to be the one making that play. How about if Nico Collins doesn’t commit? Would anyone still want Lindsey as much as I do to be that #4 WR in the class or instead go after another Mekhi Becton type OL prospect?

[Thunder]

I agree that he would be nice to have. I don’t think it will happen (it sounds like Nebraska is in prime position to land him), but he would be a good slot receiver/returner.

[INTJohn]

I was going to save this for an offseason topic but we can always come back to it too; so I’ll go off a little now.

I’m no football coaCH but common sense tells me that if you want to build a Team you need OL’s at least 5 per year. Why the fuck these so-called professional university coaches like [insert any of them] only sign 2 or 3 or 4 per year is beyond me. Maybe I should build their fuking team for them.

FBS P-5 attrition rates are 40 fuking % so if you sign 5 OL per year statistics show 2 of them per year (for whatever reason or lack thereof) will never use all of their eligibility at the school they sign with. So at 5 signed/yr you will have available 3 at best over 4 years (as most will redshirt their first yr) this gives you 12 fuking players to build a fuking line with. Thats IF you sign 5/yr.

If like Michigan over the last 10 years, you’ve only signed 31 – 40% attrition = 18 over a ten year period (1.8/yr) x 4 ~= 8 at most – not even a fuking 2 deep!! And this is a school like Michigan for fuking sakes! We’re not talking Grand Valley and theez are supposed to be the top profession coaches: Carr, RR, Hoke – even Harbaugh to an extent – fuking idiots. I could do better simply on Nationwide Law of Averages………

Michigan must get 6 OL if not 7 this year. We’re in on a solid 4 for 2018 with more in the worx; 2018 should be able to get another 6 and 2019 Michigan will have to really fuk up by not landing 3 of the top 10 rated right now rated OL + another 2 or 3 from across Murahka…………

2017 will be the last of ‘the transition years’ but the hopefully OL buildup wont be noticed till probably 2018 at the earliest.

BUT YEAH !! OL’s baybee!! enuff of these Prince Najee the Rajee types riding on the Elephant (go war eagle)……..
WE NEED OL’s!!
As I see it………..INTJohn

[Thunder]

Agreed. You want at least 15 offensive linemen on your roster at all times. Michigan had 13 this past season. There are 9 returning scholarship linemen, so 6 linemen in this class puts you at 15 (if nobody else leaves).

[INTJohn]

To carry this abit farther:
But someone, statistically will leave.
Lets say that Michigan is able to sign 7 ol’s in 2017 + the 9 they have = 16. At a statistical rate of 40% attrition, Michigan has already, however, lost 3 of those 7 so now they are back to where they were this past season at 13. Haven’t gained anything; and thats IF they sign 7 ol’s.

Now they’ll lose 2 to graduation so now they’re at 11 in 2018 but IF they can again sign 7 OL’s they’ll be up to 18; but now once again the 40% attrition factor must be added which is a loss of 3; from 18 now puts the team at the minumum desire of 15 OL’s…….

Conclusion: IF Harbaugh & co sign 7 ol in 2017 and 7 ol in 2018 Michigan football will still statistically be only at the desired minimum number of OL’s on the Team at kikoff 2018…….

Harbaugh fukt up last year by, in his second year, signing only 3 ol when he should’ve signed 7; he made the same mistake at Stanford and;
IT was the same mistake that hoke made;
It was the same mistake RR made;

It was the same mistake that Shaw at Stanford did not make.
It was the same mistake that Dabo at Clemson did not make.
It was the same mistake that Fisher at FSU did not make.
It was the same mistake that Saban at Bama did not make.

Harbaugh can overcome it IF he gets at least 6 or 7 Ol this year and 7 ol next year.

IMHO;
Thanx…………INTJohn

[Lanknows]

Strong argument. But if attrition is lower than 3 you can dial it back. If Newsome comes through healthy (or possibly red-shirts), you dial it back. If Ulizio or Spanelis step up to start capably in 2017 – you can dial it back. If Filiaga looks really good but they can afford to red-shirt him – you can dial it back.

We need numbers right now, but if Harbaugh can get these young guys looking like multi-year starters the situation can be righted quickly.

So yeah, I would start with 7 as the target because the situation is so bad right now, but I would also hope they don’t have to devote something like a third of the next class to the OL.

[Lanknows]

15 is the bare minimum IMO. It’s not just numbers, because you need to evaluate the guys who are just depth and/or won’t be ready to play at a starting level until they are 4th or 5th years. This is a lot of guys, probably the majority. You probably don’t know what you have until year 2, and then you have to account for the guys who just don’t have it also. You’ll always have at least 2 or 3 of those, who you’ll hold onto just for depth until their 4th year or spend a year or two encouraging to transfer. The scholarships still get spent.

Again, I will bring up Rodriguez who by 2010 knew he had 4 starter-caliber players as freshman or sophomores that he could count on for the next several years (Schofield, Lewan, Omameh, Molk). That situation lets you lower the number down to 15 or so. More uncertainty should mean more numbers.

[Lanknows]

I don’t think you have to take 5 a year every year. If you have a red-shirt freshman who is standing out and ready to start for 4 more years, you can back off a bit. If you have 3 guys like that you can back off a lot.

There are some economies of scale at OL because of positional versatility and skill overlap, but there are limitations to this.

Michigan is in the other side of the situation where you have proven young starters who you can comfortably pencil in to the lineup for the next 4 years. Instead they are grasping at straws and looking for immediate help from high school players.

I think they are foolish to take any less than 7 OL in this class. It looks like they will take 6 (hopefully) nominal OL and then there are a couple DL who could end up there too. I like the current approach. But I would have no problem if they took even more.

[WindyCityBlue]

A good rough rule of thumb is to take one OL for every five signees, and never take fewer than three in a class. Of course, it would help if our coaching staff were actually developing some of the ones we sign into quality players. As I’ve said before, time for Drevno to start producing, or be replaced.

[INTJohn]

This rule of thumb only is valid when you have at least 15 ol already available. If you don’t have 15 minimum you must increase the rate at which you sign them till one has reached the level of stability – hopefully something greater than 15.

OSU, Bama, FSU, Clemson, etc are at this place of stability and the last several years the above teams have in general been following your ‘general rule of thumb’.

Another teaam that is trying to amass all the OL’s available that they can is Smart at Ga. Look how many they have lined up as well as for next year.

Harbaugh & co must sign 6 or 7 this year and 7 next year – and next years class will be small compared with these last 2 but he must sign 7 next year.

We have enough gazelles & jack rabbits – we need Cape Buffalo.
IMHO…………INTJohn

[Lanknows]

They need to sign 5 or more every year until they are confident they can field a strong starting unit for the next 2+ years. I would hope that between the 2015 and 2016 classes they end up with 5 they fell confident in that they don’t need to take 7 again next year. But they might have to.

[Lanknows]

I don’t intend to be rude, but that is a terrible rule of thumb. You have to take context into account.

People killed Rodriguez for taking a small OL class but he had the OL set for the next few years AND had proven that he could develop OL recruits into starters very quickly and at a high level of success. Meanwhile the defense was completely falling apart and had to be attacked with numbers (the same way the OL situation has to be attacked with numbers now).

You have to look at your roster needs.

But yes, in the vast majority of situations you do not want to take fewer than 3 OL in a class.

[INTJohn]

The 40% attrition rate can never be ignored – its not simply about ability to play vs sitting on the bench for 4 years.

I don’t care if you have 5 OL who are the 2nd coming of Jake Long. you never know when 1 of them suffers a career ending injury.
you never know when 1 is guna get drunkt up one night and start sending nudy sexybits.
You never know when 1 of them is going to have a few drinks; cut in a bar line and end up in fight with a women & the cops…….
You never know when 1 of them walks in your office and says coach I just wana move back closer to home…….

So at some point 40% of those guys are going to NOT be there for their full term of elgibilty and when you build a Team you have to account for the reality that as soon as 5 OL enroll, 2 of them are already gone…….

And of course, now I’m talking about Building a Team; vs Coaching a Team..
We all a well aware that Harbaugh can coach a Team. Hell I think he’s a Coaching Idiot Savant…… but no where has he Built A Team. He hasn’t done this yet.
3 yrs at USD – never Built it
4 years at Stanford – never finished the build job – Shaw did it.
49’ers is different as its NFL but Jimmy coached Singletary’s players – again did not build it.
Michigan – just entering 3 years and the school is still out as to whether jimmy can Build a Team as well as Coach it.

Just because you are a world class race car driver doesn’t mean you can build a world class race car……. School is still out on whether Harbaugh can Build a Team as well as Coach one.

IMHO……….INTJohn

[Lanknows]

How did he not build SD and Stanford? Look where were those programs were at before he arrived.

Lost me here IJ.

[INTJohn]

I mean from the standpoint that he never got to a point at USD or Stanford where he was completely coaching his own players thru a 4 year cycle of development – in other words someone else ‘finished’ what he ‘started’ so we can’t say for sure what it was he actually would have built had he stayed.

Also USD was in pretty good shape prior to Harbaugh’s arrival. The previous coach at USD was not fired because of a lack of coaching ability – rather had some personality clashes with the AD that led to a mid season dismissal. Mostly what Jimmy did at USD is the same things he’s done so far at Michigan: Make the team he inherited more tough, play with an edge and bring in QB’s: Mortenson & Johnson

At Stanford – given, the program was in bad shape and agian jimmy did what he’s done at Michigan Coach what he inherited: play tough with an edge and bring in QB’s – then he left……. So we’ve never seen him finish BUILDING – if anything -what he started – Shaw did it.
At Stanford, jimmy brought in
07 – 4 OL
08 – 3 OL
09 – 2 OL
10 – 4 OL then he left after 2010
Shaw his first year brought in 2 OL and then in 2012 Shaw brought in 7 OL . So Shaw is the one deserving of the credit for Building what exists at Stanford.

This is what I mean by it.
So Harbaugh comes to Michigan – he had no time to put together a class grab what he could and he was able to snag 3 OL out of 14 incoming……
But then in 2016 – I think he should have signed 6 OL and he only signed 3. Basically doing what he did at Stanford. Now tho he’s trying to get 6 or 7; ala Shaw and what Fisher did at FSU (Fisher in 2011 signed 9OL! and in 2014 Fisher signed 8 OL!. Thats Building a Team!)

Next year harbaugh needs at least another 5 or 6 to make up for what he failed to Build in 2015……

We’ll see what happens But I think the school is still out as to whether Harbaugh can finish a ‘Build’ job. He hasn’t done it yet. If he takes another 5 or more OL in 2018 I’ll be optimistic; but if he doesn’t – goes back to only 3 I’ll still have my skepticism………

IMHO……….INTJohn

[Lanknows]

Harbaugh built the foundation at Stanford. He recruited Andrew Luck. He hired David Shaw. In 4 years he took them from 1-11 to 12-1. The turning point was Harbaugh.

You seem to be arguing Harbaugh built it and Shaw finished it? Yet Shaw has never had as good of a season as Harbaugh’s last (12-1 Orange Bowl). He HAS had sustained success — thanks largely to what Harbaugh built. Shaw’s the one who needs to prove he can build something.

You can knock Harbaugh for not staying anywhere for a long time, but that’s a different argument.

As for the OL numbers – it’s the same thing i’ve been saying every year. We need to take more and I agree with you that they didn’t take enough in 2015 and 16. BUT – if they take 6 or 7 in this class, AND if the young guys look like they will pan out – I don’t agree they have to take 7 again next year. IF the attrition rate you mention happens, then I will agree with you. Lose 3 guys and they should bump up the 2018 OL class from 4 to 7. 4 is the smallest I’d go and I would expect to land at 5 for now.

You have 7 guys on the current roster who could be back in 2018 + 7 2017 recrutis +7 2018 recruits, you are at 21 OL. That’s going to put you seriously behind at other positions. A lot of people think you need around 15-16. I think it should be closer to 18-20, but going over 20 is not optimal. You go there only if you are having serious problems. OL is important but you can’t devote a quarter of your scholarships too it without shooting yourself in the foot. If things get that bad you probably have to look at replacing Drevno with somebody who can produce players more effectively and efficiently.

[INTJohn]

Evidently you equate good coaching with program development….

I do not think they are synonymous or one in the same. My definition of Building a Program is when a Head Coach has had sustained success at the same school thru at least 3 full recruiting classes – 6 consecutive years.
Shaw has done this at Stanford.
Fisher has done this at FSU
Saban has done this at Bama
Swiney has done this at Clemson
& others Bo & Carr at Michigan on & on
Pat Fizgerald at Northwestern and Kirk Ferentz at Iowa have fulfilled the time requirements but not the sustained success requirement; there are even coaches out there who have won National Championships that do not fit my definition of a Builder of a Program because they did not have at least a 6 year sustainment of it and in some cases they were found to have cheated……

Harbaugh has yet to do any of this anywhere – he’s only 1/3 there at Michigan. School is still out on him.

So good coach – proven; in fact great coach
Program Developer (Building a Program) hasn’t yet happened;.
IMHO……….INTJohn

[Lanknows]

I accept that you can draw a distinction between coaching and building a program. Harbaugh’s done both.

Shaw hasn’t built a program, he inherited a successful one. Though, to be fair, he was on the staff with Harbaugh while it was built.

Fisher did not build FSU, he inherited a successful program from Bowden. Same goes for Carr. None of them built the program.

Sustaining success is impressive, but it is different than building it. The skillset is different. Lloyd Carr did a great job maintaining success but he was not a Bo / Harbaugh-level program-builder.

You can hold it against Harbaugh that he went from Stanford to the NFL and made a super bowl. You can draw a line in the sand at 6 years. I choose not to. Longevity and program building aren’t the same thing.

I think the 7 OL / 6 year issue is really the same thing in that you are turning what is arguably a solid rule of thumb into a firm cut-off line.

[INTJohn]

Also, to continue re Shaw; according to your logic Bo never built a program at Michigan.

Bo inherited Elliot’s Team that finished 1968 ranked No 12 in the country and that 68 team that got the shit beat out of them in Columbus at that time was ranked No 4 – they finished ranked No 12.

Elliot laid the foundation. I’ve even heard Michigan alums talking (during Hoke & RR)about how we need a coach to turn the program around like Bo did!
Bo never turned anything around. He had a 8-2 12th ranked team with 3 or 4 All-Americans on it handed to him……..

But at some point with sustained success the Program did Become Bo’s…… the same needs to be said for Shaw and any coach thats done it for 6 years: I stand & repeat – Harbaugh ain’t there yet.

IMHO……….INTJohn

[Lanknows]

No. Bo did better than Elliot. Shaw has never matched Harbaugh’s final season.

Furthermore, Bo came from outside the program and reinvented the culture. Like Harbaugh.

Shaw is Moeller/Carr. Harbaugh is Bo.

[Lanknows]

Comparing Harbaugh to Bump Elliot, if that’s what you’re doing, is pretty ridiculous. He essentially quit because he lost steam and wasn’t winning consistently. His final season was solid, but the previous decade plus was 1 rose bowl and then a bunch of mediocrity between losing seasons for what had been the best program in the country.

[Author]

Posts