Jeremy Clark will be joining Michigan in 2012

Jeremy Clark will be joining Michigan in 2012

October 24, 2011
Jeremy Clark (#2) will join the Wolverines sooner than expected.

Madisonville (KY) North Hopkins safety Jeremy Clark will be joining Michigan as part of the 2012 recruiting class.  Originally, he had been scheduled to greyshirt in 2012 and begin playing in 2013, but that is no longer the case.

I have heard rumors that at least three players on the current roster will not be returning in 2012, which is quite possibly the reason that Clark’s enroll date has been moved up.

Clark’s commitment post can be found here, and while I originally gave him a TTB rating of 49, new highlights and his performance as a senior here in 2011 will definitely cause that rating to move upward when I revise them after the season.

Now that he’s been added to the 2012 class, you can see him and the rest of 2012’s offers and commitments on the 2012 Offer Board.


  1. Comments: 21384
    Oct 24, 2011 at 4:02 PM

    Do you currently have his new highlights? Or are they on a premium website?

  2. Comments: 21384
    Oct 24, 2011 at 4:26 PM

    Can u say who may not come back next yr??

  3. Comments: 21384
    Oct 24, 2011 at 5:00 PM

    @ Anonymous 12:02 p.m.

    The new highlights are available on Youtube.

  4. Comments: 21384
    Oct 24, 2011 at 5:02 PM

    @ person from 12:26 p.m.

    I've heard some names, but I hate to spread rumors until they're officially announced. They're all in their first or second year at Michigan.

  5. Comments: 21384
    Oct 24, 2011 at 6:24 PM


    Is Hoke is to safeties as Rodriguez to slot receivers?

    There are going to be up to 10 safeties on the 2012 roster: Kovacs, Gordon, Johnson, Robinson, Furman, Taylor, Carter, Gant, Wilson, and Clark.

    Even if you count Taylor as a CB (I count him here because he seems similar to Gordon and the coaches have used him at the nickel spot a la Johnson and Gordon) and also assume a guy disappears due to attrition of some sort, you're still looking at 8 players for the position. There is no let-up in 2013 either, as only Kovacs departs and Thomas is already committed.

    Given that there is some overlap in skills with other DBs (just like slot WR had overlap with RB and outside WR), isn't going 4 or 5 deep at the safety positions a crazy number?

  6. Comments: 21384
    Oct 24, 2011 at 6:29 PM

    also – some view Standifer as ultimately ending up at Safety due to his size.

  7. Comments: 21384
    Oct 24, 2011 at 8:32 PM

    I think getting commitments from safety-types is much better than from slot-receiver types. The safety guys can play safety, corner, and some have the frames to bulk up and play LBs. The 5'7"-5'10" slot receivers that RR stacked up are generally limited to just that, being slot receivers. I mean, some may be fast enough to play corners, but height will limit them to playing in the slot. Can a 5'8" realistically cover a 6'2"/6'3" Floyd-type of receiver? I mean, guys that are 6'/6'1" running a 4.5 have problems with bigger/more physical receivers.

  8. Comments: 21384
    Oct 25, 2011 at 2:01 AM

    I think Furman will end up at linebacker. Hes too good an athlete to not be on the field. Gant is a big slow body who could also wind up at linebacker.

  9. Comments: 21384
    Oct 25, 2011 at 3:28 AM

    Josh Furman and Marvin Robinson may both be big enough to play will as early as next year. Whether they have the skill set, I have no idea.

  10. Comments: 21384
    Oct 25, 2011 at 8:04 AM

    @ Lankownia 2:24 p.m.

    I guess Hoke might be recruiting safeties like Rodriguez recruited slot receivers. Perhaps it has something to do with how he feels about the backups, particularly Marvin Robinson and Josh Furman. I agree that the number of safeties is too high. Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised to see one of the safeties transfer in the offseason.

  11. Comments: 21384
    Oct 25, 2011 at 2:38 PM

    If the argument is that Safeties are going to move to LB, then the issue just migrates to that position group. There are 14 LBs projected on the 2012 roster without adding in any position transfers from safety. That's 4 or 5 deep.

    I don't think it's the worst thing in the world, but I think the coaches are making a mistake in putting relatively few people along the OL and DL and too many at LB/S. I also think they'd be wise to find another corner. My hope is that it's just a temporary problem and that they'll continue to heavily target those positions in '13 (or start to in the case of CB). The Schutt non-recruitment remains baffling. Besides OL, Yuri Wright is the guy I'd most like to see end up in the class.

  12. Comments: 21384
    Oct 25, 2011 at 2:44 PM

    One more question Thunder, about WR recruiting.

    I feel like Michigan is going to land at least one guy but I have a hard time differentiating between Payton and Powe, Darboh and Madris. It seems like they're all decent players but none are elite. If Diggs and Burbridge are destined to be non-options, is there a strong preference between these targets?

  13. Comments: 21384
    Oct 25, 2011 at 3:13 PM

    @ Lankownia 10:38 a.m.

    I agree that the LB position (and potentially S position) is being overpopulated. All I can think of is that they're not happy with the leftover LB/S talent and they're trying to get guys in here who can play immediately. Mike Jones comes to mind as an upperclassman who's nowhere near playing, and like I said, there are a couple guys who might be transferring after the season, in addition to Gregg Brown.

  14. Comments: 21384
    Oct 25, 2011 at 3:20 PM

    @ Lankownia 10:44 a.m.

    I would agree that the receivers left on the board aren't necessarily elite. They could develop into good players and perhaps NFL prospects, but there's no sure-fire NFL pick in three years like Julio Jones, Dorial Green-Beckham, etc.

    My preference would be as follows:

    1. Darboh
    2. Payton
    3. Powe
    4. Madaris

    I think the first two would be a good combination of explosiveness (Darboh) and refinement (Payton).

  15. Comments: 21384
    Oct 25, 2011 at 7:08 PM

    "they're not happy with the …talent and they're trying to get guys in here who can play immediately."

    I think that was probably true with Rodriguez and slot WR too. They recruited Odoms and Robinson and Gallon, but none of those guys proved all that effective initially as a big-play threat off screen passes and whatnot.

    I just hope that over-allocating numbers to a position group or two doesn't come back to haunt Hoke like it did Rodriguez. I don't think it will but I am mildly concerned about it.

  16. Comments: 21384
    Oct 25, 2011 at 7:16 PM

    I guess I feel like since none of these guys are elite, I don't have a strong preference between a top choice and a 5th choice (Chesson seems like another prospect who is heavily considering Michigan).

    Payton does seem ready to play right away,but with Stonum, Roundtree, Gallon and Dileo all back I think we'll be fine next year, regardless. 2013 and beyond – who knows. Like other positions, we're looking for impact players.

    From what I've read/seen I think I agree that Darboh is highest on my list.

  17. Comments: 21384
    Oct 26, 2011 at 12:05 AM

    @ Lank 3:16 p.m.

    I'm not immune to a bit of worry about it, either. But I agree with Anon 4:52: "safety-types" seem to have more versatility than do the "slot-types."

  18. Comments: 21384
    Oct 26, 2011 at 3:43 PM


    Maybe, but nominal slots like Odoms, Roundtree, and Gallon have been utilized as outside WRs too. And guys like Denard and Smith are people who some want moved to slot.

    I do think a lot of Safeties can move to WLB, but we're already pretty loaded up with prospects there. Maybe some safeties can move to CB, but that seems to be as rare as slot WR moving to RB.

    I think the better argument is that with more spread offenses you need more DBs. The nickelback position could be a functional starter and since Hoke/Mattison seem to prefer a bigger guy there we could arguably consider safety to be 3 positions. Though, again, that comes at the expense of SLB or WDE, where we're also pretty stocked.

    I guess you could say it's just defense in general (other than NT) that seems to be getting more attention, which…duh, defensive-oriented staff now.

You must belogged in to post a comment.