Biggest Recruiting Needs in 2021

Biggest Recruiting Needs in 2021


February 14, 2020
Belleville (MI) Belleville DT Damon Payne

Michigan recently wrapped up its 2020 recruiting class, so we turn our attention forward to what the Wolverines need in the class of 2021.

As a quick reminder, these players are already committed to Michigan in 2021:

  • QB J.J. McCarthy (LINK)
  • OL Giovanni El-Hadi (LINK)

1. DEFENSIVE TACKLE

Michigan played with very little depth at defensive tackle during the 2019 season, eventually relying on unproven walk-on Jess Speight to play key snaps late in the year. Depth was hurt by the transfer of Michael Dwumfour to Rutgers, but Dwumfour was injury-prone and often ineffective. The Wolverines brought in a couple solid prospects in 2018 (Chris Hinton, Jr. and Mazi Smith). When the 2020 season wraps, Carlo Kemp’s career will be over. The Wolverines do have some young defensive ends who could bulk up to play defensive tackle, but they do need some true tackles to shore up the interior.

Hit the jump for more.

Hopewell (VA) Hopewell CB Treveyon Henderson (image via Richmond Times-Dispatch)

2. CORNERBACK

The corner position seems to have been particularly volatile at Michigan in recent years, with potential starting-caliber corners like Benjamin St-Juste (Minnesota) and Keith Washington (West Virginia) transferring, along with highly touted recruit Myles Sims (Georgia Tech) bailing after just one season in Ann Arbor. Corner is typically a spot where recruiting rankings translate pretty well, and after senior Ambry Thomas graduates, Michigan will be relying on as-yet-unproven solid recruits (Darion Green-Warren, Jalen Perry) and moderately talented veterans (Vincent Gray, German Green).

Scottsdale (AZ) Saguaro DE Quintin Somerville (image via 247 Sports)

3. DEFENSIVE END

Good defenses these days are often predicated on the ability to get to the passer, and Michigan has whiffed on elite weakside ends in recent years. Despite edge rushers Chase Winovich and Joshua Uche impressing over the past few seasons, speed-rush ends have chosen other schools. That has left Kwity Paye, a versatile guy but hardly a speed rusher, as a starting weakside end for two years, but the 2020 season will be his last.

Olney (MD) Good Counsel OT Landon Tengwall (image via 247 Sports)

4. OFFENSIVE TACKLE

You can never have enough offensive tackles, because a) it’s an important position and b) failed tackles can move inside to guard. I believe Michigan will have some failed offensive tackles who would be best served by moving inside (or transferring), and the position will need to be replenished. Add in the fact that the position often takes a couple years to percolate before they’re field-ready, and you want to bring in tackles pretty regularly.

Missouri City (TX) Hightower WR Latrell Neville (image via 247 Sports)
Lexington (KY) Frederick Douglass WR Dekel Crowdus (image via 247 Sports)

5. OUTSIDE RECEIVER

Michigan has loaded up on slot receiver types over the past couple classes. And while the general direction of college football seems to be headed the way of shorter, quicker players, I believe you still need some good-sized (though not giant) guys on the outside. Aside from starting slot receiver Ronnie Bell, Michigan has just two receivers who are 6’0″ or taller: 6’2″ Cornelius Johnson and 6’0″ Roman Wilson. Michigan should continue to go after receivers who are at least in the 6’1″ to 6’3″ range to ensure they have flexibility at the receiver position.

44 comments

  1. Lanknows
    Comments: 5949
    Joined: 8/11/2015
    Lanknows
    Feb 10, 2020 at 12:11 PM

    Fun post. Some opinions and reactions below.

    QB should be number 1. A bit boring but it’s the most important position on the field by a longshot. I’m not sure I buy the speculation but if Milton and McCaffrey don’t both finish out at UM there’s not much proven depth in 2021. More importantly for a 2021 recruit is the long-term and Michigan just took a depth prospect in the 2020 class so there is pressure. JJ McCarthy is a top 20 national prospect right now – just what the program needs.

    Big WR is a luxury. This has been a long-standing trend that the Super Bowl just highlighted. Of course you want a 6’6 guy with 4.4. speed but the important part is the speed. More important than either is hands, ball skills, route running etc. In the modern era, WR is a skill position. Some of the best downfield targets are short WRs or TEs.

    Safety should be on the list. Michigan has recruited this pretty strongly in the last couple classes but they need to keep it coming. Safety personnel started at 4 positions last year and a 5th came on in passing downs.

    I think CB belongs on the list but Seldon or Dennis were not mentioned. I think they’re more relevant than Green generating zero buzz. There’s good talent coming in. The biggest recruiting need maybe keeping Zordich around. He is rumored to have interviewed for a HC job at YSU.

    • Lanknows
      Comments: 5949
      Joined: 8/11/2015
      Lanknows
      Feb 10, 2020 at 1:45 PM

      I love having a big WR on the team like Nico Collins, but I hate chasing tall WRs with limitations because of a perceived need.

      This was a big mistake in the Hoke era. Immediately following a pretty nice class of WRs (Chesson, Darboh, Funchess) Hoke went after 3 more big WRs (York, Jones, Dukes) and then even more in the next class (Harris, Canteen, Ways). All but Canteen were 6’2 or more.

      That’s how you end up with a guy like Grant Perry, stolen from Northwestern just before signing day, playing a critical role in his first game as a true freshman and contributing directly to two INTs.

      The points to two potential problems – looking for the wrong kind of skill but also not pursuing a mix of skills.

      I do like to have a mix of skills in the receiving corps but that doesn’t mean you have to reach for height necessarily. Shorter WRs can have very different skillsets. For example Jeremy Gallon wasn’t that fast but was excellent at jump balls because he had the timing, instincts, and body control to make it happen. Junior Hemingway at just 6’1 was one of the better downfield guys we’ve had due to his strength and toughness.

      • Thunder
        Comments: 3642
        Joined: 7/13/2015
        Feb 10, 2020 at 2:31 PM

        My problem with chasing big wide receivers is when you take a big wide receiver who can’t run. York and Dukes were a couple guys who couldn’t run.

        That Harris/Ways/Canteen class was a different animal, in my opinion. Yes, Harris was a big receiver, but he was also an outstanding basketball player. His failure was pretty much unexpected altogether. He was the #68 overall player in the class. I overrated Ways, but he was supposedly looking pretty good before hurting his foot and falling behind. And Canteen was a standout in practice/the spring game and then fell off the face of the earth. It was a very strange class, and in an alternate universe, I could see those guys being very successful. It just seemed like injuries and circumstances got in the way.

        • Lanknows
          Comments: 5949
          Joined: 8/11/2015
          Lanknows
          Feb 10, 2020 at 3:53 PM

          None of those guys were good players at Michigan or elsewhere. Recruiting rankings and our optimism at the time are irrelevant

          I was skeptical of Harris, and said so at the time because of his stated rationale for college choice. Namely: he said he would have gone to MSU if he chose basketball but UM was his football pick. Izzo over Beilein & Hoke over Dantonio — wrong on both counts.

          Anyway, the point I’m trying to make is that Hoke had a very narrow and antiquated vision at WR. He was very focused on specific-sized players to fit at WR. It was not the way the game had evolved and, more relevant, even on his own dang roster the best outside receivers he had didn’t fit that mold. Gallon and Funchess both came from ‘inside’.

          It’s not why he got fired but it reflects the narrow and out-dated views that Borges and company tried to build off. I think if you look around the NFL and college then and now you see that you don’t need traditional “outside” WRs to win.

          Not saying it wouldn’t be nice, just that it isn’t necessary and I don’t want Michigan chasing after a prototype like Hoke did. Just my 2 cents. Certainly if you can get another class like DPJ, Collins, and Black I would take it every time but that’s hard to come by at Michigan.

          • Thunder
            Comments: 3642
            Joined: 7/13/2015
            Feb 10, 2020 at 9:45 PM

            I mean, I sort of understand what you’re saying, but I don’t see “big and fast and good at jumping” as a prototype that should be scoffed at. There are lots of good receivers that are big and fast and good at jumping, just like there are lots of good receivers who are short and fast and change direction well.

            We’ve talked about this with other positions, but the most important thing is to be good. Short, tall, fast, slow, etc., being good is better than being bad. If you “hit” on your evaluations, then you will be praised. If you miss, you won’t. Michigan got somewhat unlucky when Harris, Ways, etc. had injury problems, didn’t pan out, etc. I don’t really care about the prototype, as long as the guys within your prototype are evaluated well. There are 6’3″ receivers who turn out to be good in every single class. Are you recruiting the good 6’3″ receivers, or are you recruiting the ones who can’t catch, who run lazy routes, who won’t block, etc.?

          • Lanknows
            Comments: 5949
            Joined: 8/11/2015
            Lanknows
            Feb 11, 2020 at 12:38 PM

            I’m with you – the most important thing is to be good.

            But let’s recognize that there is a limited pool of guys who are big, fast, and good and Michigan is not getting very many of them after Alabama, Clemson, OSU, LSU, etc. pick of most of them.

            Michigan is mostly going to get guys who are lacking in one of those 3 areas. So they have to choose. Rodriguez mostly ignored the big part to get speed. Hoke mostly ignored the ‘good’ part to get size. Harbaugh has mostly emphasized good but did take a very large 2017 class of Black Collins DPJ and Martin.

            • Lanknows
              Comments: 5949
              Joined: 8/11/2015
              Lanknows
              Feb 11, 2020 at 12:49 PM

              That class has been a mixed bag but it’s an outlier class in many regards.

              1. It was size focused. Black and Collins were “not burners” and even Martin was pretty big for a potential ‘slot’. They chose these guys over KJ Hamler.

              2. It’s not sustainable to recruit at that level. DPJ was an in-state 5-star WR all the elite programs wanted. That’s an unusual situation that we may not see again for a couple decades.

              The recruiting classes since have been VERY different. There has been something like 8 WR recruits give or take an athlete and only one of them has been ranked in the top 150 (Henning) and only one of them (C.Johnson) has been taller than 6’1 ‘slot’ Ronnie Bell.

              So why the change? Why did Michigan not recruit more big guys like they did in ’17?

              One explanation is that they already had enough big guys and needed ‘slots’. Another is that they have evolved, recognizing that what they were doing wasn’t really working all that great and that Pep and Gattis knew they needed more speed and skill than size and jumping ability.

        • Lanknows
          Comments: 5949
          Joined: 8/11/2015
          Lanknows
          Feb 12, 2020 at 12:07 PM

          I’m going to rewind back to Dukes.

          In a generally positive write-up that acknowledged a lack of speed you wrote that Dukes “takes care of the jump ball/possession role.”

          https://touchthebanner.blogspot.com/2012/02/jaron-dukes-wolverine.html

          I am saying — that is not a role we need to fill.

          In the comments section TTB Andrew noted that the coaches were explicit about how they wanted size in WRs. This is almost a decade ago and it was already obvious to many fans then it was a flawed approach to emphasize size.

          • Thunder
            Comments: 3642
            Joined: 7/13/2015
            Feb 12, 2020 at 1:12 PM

            Many people think Nico Collins is an excellent receiver, and one of the reasons he’s successful is because of his size. Several times this past season, he made big catches by going up for the ball and/or boxing out defenders. You say that it’s a flawed approach to emphasize size, but Michigan’s best receiver (to some) is successful not because of speed/quickness, but because of size.

            We all know Dukes wasn’t successful at Michigan, but that’s not necessarily because he was tall. He was slow (and probably not very good, though we never saw him on the field much anyway so who knows). PERHAPS Michigan’s struggles in the following couple years were due to the fact that they didn’t have a jump ball guy, or more of them.

            In summary, you’re still arguing against recruiting size. You can recruit quickness, but quickness doesn’t always pan out, either. Freddy Canteen and Dennis Norfleet are both small-ish, quick guys who never did much on offense.

            If you throw me a Jeremy Gallon, I can throw you a Terrence Robinson. If you throw me a Jaron Dukes, I can throw you a Nico Collins. Maybe Nico Collins has had a couple good seasons strictly BECAUSE he’s a jump ball guy and the coaches knew that Shea Patterson was inaccurate downfield, so they needed to play a guy with a large catch radius.

            Overall, this is kind of an anti-tall-guy argument, but we should all be taking a pro-good-player stance.

            • Lanknows
              Comments: 5949
              Joined: 8/11/2015
              Lanknows
              Feb 12, 2020 at 3:09 PM

              Michigan had good downfield receivers subsequent to Dukes – they were a nominal slot and TE.

          • Lanknows
            Comments: 5949
            Joined: 8/11/2015
            Lanknows
            Feb 12, 2020 at 3:08 PM

            We all agree we need good players. We all agree height is good to have. Were we disagree is about height being a NEED.

            From Nico’s welcome post:
            “Michigan has not had a ton of success recruiting jump-ball types of guys (Csont’e York, Jaron Dukes, etc.), but Collins is taller and more athletic than those guys.”

            As you implied above, Michigan has recruited a whole lot of big WR with questions about speed and skill with very few having panned out over the last decade. I am glad Nico did. I have nothing bad to say about him. Big WRs like him are fun to watch. I agree that size is his most outstanding attribute and he is Michigan’s best WR right now. Put Randy Moss in the slot between Devin Funchess and Nico Collins and I’ll be a happy fan.

            But Michigan needs to look back at the last decade and learn from it. How many tall recruits do you have to take to get a productive receiver? If you look at the ratio of who has panned out to be a productive player at Michigan I am pretty sure the 6′ or less bucket will be better than the 6’3 or more. Looking at the lower rated guys, especially true.

            I am against reaching for height at the expense of skill. We don’t need to do it. But if we can add another big and highly ranked class like 2017 I’m all for it.

            • Thunder
              Comments: 3642
              Joined: 7/13/2015
              Feb 12, 2020 at 5:33 PM

              This is going to seem like a semantic argument, but I think it’s important:

              “But Michigan needs to look back at the last decade and learn from it. How many tall recruits do you have to take to get a productive receiver?”

              It’s important to distinguish COACHES from PROGRAMS from FANS. As a fan I see Terrence Robinson and D.J. Williamson and Jeremy Gallon and Martavious Odoms and Oliver Martin and Ronnie Bell when I’m thinking about slot receivers recruited over the years. JIM HARBAUGH probably has no clue who D.J. Williamson is.

              So how many tall receivers do you need to recruit before you get a productive receiver? Umm…it’s arguable that 1 is the right answer. Michigan didn’t get a tall wide receiver in 2015 or 2016 under Jim Harbaugh. Their first 6’2″+ receivers came in the 2017 class (Collins, Peoples-Jones, Black). One is a standout receiver (Collins), one is leaving early for the draft (Peoples-Jones), and one is transferring after reportedly looking like the best of the three when he first arrived on campus (Black).

              MICHIGAN maybe hasn’t done that well recruiting big receivers in the last 10-15 years, but JIM HARBAUGH has a pretty good hit rate while at Michigan. When you factor in how Harbaugh did elsewhere, how Josh Gattis has done elsewhere, etc., that’s a much larger study that I don’t have the data to address.

            • Lanknows
              Comments: 5949
              Joined: 8/11/2015
              Lanknows
              Feb 13, 2020 at 5:42 PM

              Yeah, that’s a legit point about Harbaugh and Williamson. That said, I would argue the phenomena of shorter receivers panning out more often is not just limited to Michigan. That’s just a common reference for a larger observation.

              In other words Michigan can learn from other instances of the same thing it has seen here. e.g., OSU is beating us with WR speed not size

              Admittedly, I also don’t have the data to support the global hit rate, but it seems like that’s the way the game has gone and will continue to go. If all these teams were hitting on 6’4 WRs we’d be seeing more of them. Instead we’re seeing more 5’10 and 6′ guys than ever.

              Furthermore, the recruiting rankings explicitly state they consider NFL potential – which factors in prototypical size – but may not be relevant to college production.

              For that reason – if you give me a choice between two equivalently ranked players with equivalent production, I’m generally going to be more excited about an undersized one than a jumbo one. The jumbo one is more likely to be overrated because he passes the “look test” and has NFL potential. The little one is getting it done “despite” something that probably doesn’t matter.

        • Lanknows
          Comments: 5949
          Joined: 8/11/2015
          Lanknows
          Feb 12, 2020 at 12:19 PM

          Now let’s move to York who was given a TTB rating of 79.

          https://touch-the-banner.com/csonte-york-wolverine/

          It was noted that “York does not seem to be a threat to run much after the catch.” and “he just doesn’t have much lateral quickness”.

          This was mostly dismissed because he was going to be a tall downfield jump ball guy.

          This is not to call out the predictions – these are low rated recruits despite being very tall – and they failed to pan out accordingly. What I’m talking about is the notion that we need guys to fit this mold. That is how you end up reaching.

          You don’t need it. 5’10 guys like Desmond Howard and Jeremy Gallon and Hines Ward can be great downfield threats. So can TEs – which we recruit a lot of.

          Michigan is going to be totally fine if they recruit a big ol bucket full of speedy ‘slots’ as long as some of them have the skills – not necessarily size – to be downfield targets.

  2. Avatar
    Comments: 395
    Joined: 12/24/2016
    INTJohn
    Feb 10, 2020 at 10:24 PM

    Desmond wasn’t big.
    Mostly you need wr’s that will run crisp sharp routes choreographed with the QB’s timing and can catch the ball – duhh! If they can actually throw a downfield block, too, well thats a bonus…… intjohn

    • Lanknows
      Comments: 5949
      Joined: 8/11/2015
      Lanknows
      Feb 11, 2020 at 12:57 PM

      That’s right. But what you hear getting talked about a lot more than route running is how high a guy can jump, his ‘catch radius’, and his 40.

      I understand why those are important indicators but the game has evolved away from it. There is still some old school perspectives informing the narrative. In other words, the shorter players are more likely to be underrated and the bigger ones the opposite.

      WRs are like basketball centers — the game has changed to demphasize size at the position. If you can get a skilled/smart 7 footer you do it of course, but smart teams have figured out you are better off with a 6’8 guy who is tough, smart, boxes out, and has skill. The teams who have been focused on size have fallen behind.

      I hope Michigan doesn’t feel like they need to force it to find size at ‘outside’ WR.

  3. Avatar
    Comments: 1863
    Joined: 1/19/2016
    je93
    Feb 11, 2020 at 9:00 PM

    Lank, I’m not sure where you get your info, but who insists on big tall WRs, at the expense of everything else? Hoke 2013

    The best fit is priority: hands, routes, speed/size … it all matters, but the coaches have to look at the roster, and fill needs. If we have a half-dozen slots under 5’10, but only CJohnson as the big & capable wide out, size does need to be addressed. Not at the expense of all else, but you want & need a mix

    Take a look at WR recruiting rankings. All-conference lists. Draft boards. Size isn’t everything, but should not be easily dismissed. That approach would be just as terrible as Hoke 2013

    • Lanknows
      Comments: 5949
      Joined: 8/11/2015
      Lanknows
      Feb 12, 2020 at 12:01 PM

      Where do I get my info? From people who assert “size does need to be addressed” and from the recent history with Brady Hoke.

      I’ll repeat my point. WR size isn’t necessary to win. You do not need it.

      As Thunder wrote ” the general direction of college football seems to be headed the way of shorter, quicker player”. This is common mainstream knowledge documented in may places. It has been going on for a long time.

      That doesn’t mean size isn’t valuable or that it is irrelevant. No one is “dismissing it’. You want it if you can get it without sacrificing elsewhere. If you can find a 6’4 versions of Sainristil and Bell – go out and get them. If you can land the 5-star everyone wants, by all means go ahead. Is Tee Higgins considering a grad transfer? Come on down!

      Chances are you cannot get those guys. In most cases it comes down to a choice of tradeoffs. Adding size means sacrificing speed or skill.

      Michigan should not repeat past mistakes straining to find size at WR. They should not take size at the expense of skill.

      • Avatar
        Comments: 1346
        Joined: 8/11/2015
        WindyCityBlue
        Feb 12, 2020 at 8:15 PM

        We DID land the 5 star that everyone wanted. He did not stand out. Harbaugh has not been able to produce a QB that can take advantage of top-notch talent at receiver.

        • Lanknows
          Comments: 5949
          Joined: 8/11/2015
          Lanknows
          Feb 13, 2020 at 5:44 PM

          I think Nico has played like the 5-star and DPJ like a 4-star.

          As is the case with recruiting rankings in general, they are more right in aggregate than in specific cases.

          • Avatar
            Comments: 1346
            Joined: 8/11/2015
            WindyCityBlue
            Feb 13, 2020 at 8:18 PM

            Nico Collins hasn’t even been close to 5 star performance. This fan base’s standards for elite play are abysmally low. Jerry Jeudy (remember him) was a 5 star recruit, and played like one.

            • Lanknows
              Comments: 5949
              Joined: 8/11/2015
              Lanknows
              Feb 14, 2020 at 12:21 PM

              So were DPJ, Joseph Lewis, and Trevon Grimes.

              Collins is better than all of them.

              Jeudy is the outlier.

            • Lanknows
              Comments: 5949
              Joined: 8/11/2015
              Lanknows
              Feb 14, 2020 at 12:24 PM

              “Playing like a 5-star” if you base it on how 5-stars actually play is a mixed bag of busts, decent contributors, all conference players, and all Americans. #rashan

              • GKblue
                Comments: 352
                Joined: 8/11/2015
                GKblue
                Feb 14, 2020 at 12:49 PM

                I am a supporter of Nico Collins’ play, and I understand the logic you use to evaluate him. You know what the “playing like a five star” normally implies.

                “Mixed bag” while true is circuitous logic in this specific instance.

              • Avatar
                Comments: 1346
                Joined: 8/11/2015
                WindyCityBlue
                Feb 14, 2020 at 1:26 PM

                Except nobody bases “playing like a 5 star” on that unless they’re being disingenuous. It’s playing the way you expect a 5 star recruit will play when you get excited about signing them. Do you find yourself thinking or saying that Ronnie Bell is playing like a 2 star? Of course you don‘t. But by your argument, you should be.

                • Lanknows
                  Comments: 5949
                  Joined: 8/11/2015
                  Lanknows
                  Feb 14, 2020 at 1:57 PM

                  I don’t expect 5-stars to play like All Americans. Because most of them don’t.

              • Lanknows
                Comments: 5949
                Joined: 8/11/2015
                Lanknows
                Feb 14, 2020 at 1:55 PM

                I’ll cop to being deliberately obtuse here but there’s a motive.

                If you mean all-american why not just say that? Most 5-stars are not that. There’s an inaccurate implication in the choice of wording.

      • Avatar
        Comments: 1863
        Joined: 1/19/2016
        je93
        Feb 12, 2020 at 9:34 PM

        “Recent history?” The 2013 class you’re referring to was seven years ago, and under a coach who got fired shortly after

        Again, take a look at recruiting rankings, all-conference selections, and the draft. Size is valued, and rightfully so; just as speed, hands & routes are. Just because Hoke took big but slow/unathletic guys nearly a decade ago, doesn’t make it any less true

        • Lanknows
          Comments: 5949
          Joined: 8/11/2015
          Lanknows
          Feb 13, 2020 at 5:45 PM

          Nobody said size wasn’t valued. You’re talkin to Lank again but arguing with someone else.

          • Avatar
            Comments: 1863
            Joined: 1/19/2016
            je93
            Feb 13, 2020 at 7:10 PM

            “big WR is a luxury” is it? Not according to recruiting ranking, all-conference lists, or the draft. Look at the top 20+, and you might find 3 who are under 6′

            “I hate chasing tall WRs with limitations because of a perceived need”
            no one but Hoke sacrifices for size, and that was 7yrs ago

            “doesn’t mean you have to reach for height necessarily”
            Again, you claim it’s the norm, but can’t cite anyone outside of 2013 Hoke

            “the phenomena of shorter receivers panning out more often is not just limited to Michigan”

            I’d go on, but anticipate you dodging, and then resorting to insults

            • Lanknows
              Comments: 5949
              Joined: 8/11/2015
              Lanknows
              Feb 14, 2020 at 12:15 PM

              @WJE

              Not the same thing as need.

              Punters aren’t on recruiting lists but you need them.

              OSU doesn’t need tall WRs to beat us. NFL teams don’t need them to make the Super Bowl.

              I keep telling you that height is a nice to have. You keep telling it back to me. I would say you are making a point, but probably not the one you intend.

              • Avatar
                Comments: 1863
                Joined: 1/19/2016
                je93
                Feb 14, 2020 at 1:09 PM

                Bad examples. All three of ohio’s draftable WRs are 6′ or more (BV is 6’4)

                I’ll let you look up how many Super Bowl catches were made by Cheifs under 6′ ?

              • Lanknows
                Comments: 5949
                Joined: 8/11/2015
                Lanknows
                Feb 14, 2020 at 6:00 PM

                LOL. Yes I very clearly said we should only recruit receivers under 6′ and you have proved me wrong. I think I need to meltdown my spreadsheets immediately.

          • Avatar
            Comments: 1863
            Joined: 1/19/2016
            je93
            Feb 13, 2020 at 7:12 PM

            Um, read your own posts. It’s a lot, but all there

            • Lanknows
              Comments: 5949
              Joined: 8/11/2015
              Lanknows
              Feb 14, 2020 at 12:16 PM

              I encourage you to read my posts. It’s all there.

  4. Avatar
    Comments: 1346
    Joined: 8/11/2015
    WindyCityBlue
    Feb 12, 2020 at 8:12 PM

    Let’s not forget the bigger problem. We’re never going to have a great passing game if our senior starter is only completing 56% of his passes, no matter who we have at receiver. Harbaugh has yet to field a top-notch passer in 5 years, and we still have nothing more than finger-crossing in that regard for this year.

    • Lanknows
      Comments: 5949
      Joined: 8/11/2015
      Lanknows
      Feb 13, 2020 at 5:49 PM

      did Saban find that alabama?
      did Meyer find that at OSU?
      did the guy you want to replace Harbaugh with find it at XU?

      • Avatar
        Comments: 1346
        Joined: 8/11/2015
        WindyCityBlue
        Feb 13, 2020 at 8:13 PM

        Not sure what any of those deflections has to do with the points I made:
        1. We’re never going to have a great passing game if our senior starter is only completing 56% of his passes, no matter who we have at receiver.

        2. Harbaugh has yet to field a top-notch passer in 5 years, and we still have nothing more than finger-crossing in that regard for this year.

        Do you have any actual facts to dispute either of those statements?

        And when Harbaugh can field a NC team without a great passing game, like Saban did in his third year at Alabama and Meyer did at his second year at Florida and his third year at OSU, let me know.

        • Lanknows
          Comments: 5949
          Joined: 8/11/2015
          Lanknows
          Feb 14, 2020 at 12:37 PM

          To respond to the one question you asked – No I do not dispute the statements.

          I would not call any of our QBs “top notch” since Denard. I think you need to do better than 56% to be a great passer. If by “finger-crossing” you mean hope – I agree we have that as well.

          Since you bring up deflection without answering the questions I posed – I will make my point more explicit.

          You don’t need a “great passing game” or “a top-notch passer” to win a national championship.

          You seem to agree with my point. Kumbaya.

          • Avatar
            Comments: 1346
            Joined: 8/11/2015
            WindyCityBlue
            Feb 14, 2020 at 1:19 PM

            You didn’t need a great passer or a great passing game to win a NC when Meyer and Saban first got theirs. You could do it if you were loaded everywhere else on offense and had a killer defense (which has never been the case with Harbaugh anyway) But things have changed, and even Saban and Meyer realized that. They stopped relying on “game managers” Harbaugh is still behind the times.

            • Lanknows
              Comments: 5949
              Joined: 8/11/2015
              Lanknows
              Feb 14, 2020 at 4:51 PM

              I don’t think Harbaugh is going for ‘game managers’. He hired Pep who changed the offense to shotgun-heavy and dropped the FB. He hired Gattis to advance further in that direction. Michigan’s 2019 offense looked nothing like the 2015 offense.

              I’m starting to think you’re not going to give this Harbaugh guy a fair shake!

  5. Avatar
    Comments: 395
    Joined: 12/24/2016
    INTJohn
    Feb 14, 2020 at 9:47 PM

    Speed & quickness are most important then endurance & strength. Size in and of itself is all but meaningless. A 2 ton rock that doesn’t move, that just sits there has no kinetic energy what so ever. A guy thats 5’2″ that can run a 8 second 100 yard sprint and can catch a ball with some consistency will be in the hof.

    Bob Hayes, for example, who literally all by himself caused the invention of the zone defense because nfl defenses were absolutely terrified of him and no 1 could keep up with him man to man. AND Bob hayes like Desmond, was not a big guy – 5′ 11″ and as far as his ability to catch a pass – average at best. But he’s in the hof. Speed baybee, speed & quickness trumps everything else. If you can’t move you lose.

    As far as Harbaugh – really? There is nothing creative or innovative about jim Harbaugh as a football coach at all. He is at best a “reactionist” – reacts to what doesn’t/ hasn’t worked – then he ‘reacts’. Nothing innovative, visionary or farseeing what so ever. He grasps at straws – trying to find an offensive guru who can save his ‘horse with blinders” unable to see into the future coaching confusion and rigid football prejudicial knowledge…………
    Also, his lack of landing ohio recruits and being able to lock Michigan recruiting down is a very big part, I think why he can’t coach a Michigan team after 5 years, to a victory over OSU……..
    The dude is “slow”………..INTJohn

    • GKblue
      Comments: 352
      Joined: 8/11/2015
      GKblue
      Feb 15, 2020 at 6:35 AM

      In my personal evolution as a football fan I was always on the edge of my seat when Hayes went deep. The game was slower then and “the world’s fastest man” was a weapon for Dallas.

      When OJ came into the league they tried to make him a receiver first because of his speed, but running the football as we know is what he did best in Buffalo. The era of great running backs.

      I guess what I’m trying to say is a great receiver has to have hands. I was taught that if you can touch it you can catch it. Speed, quickness, route running, toughness, pushoff or physicality, leaping ability, size are all components. The QB has to get the ball to the receiver and the target has to hang on to it… now let’s add yards after catch as another component…

    • Lanknows
      Comments: 5949
      Joined: 8/11/2015
      Lanknows
      Feb 15, 2020 at 11:21 AM

      Agree with all these thoughts on WRs.

      Disagree on recruiting any specific geography. Rodriguez got criticized for his geography choices. Hoke for his. Now Harbaugh getting it too. Nobody is happy even with top 10 recruiting classes.

      And then when the 5stars come they are “disappointing” all conference performers.

      All that matters is winning. The fanbase will be happy with recruiting 3 stars from Alaska if it leads to national titles and unhappy with 5 stars from Michigan Ohio New Jersey Texas if it doesn’t.

You must belogged in to post a comment.