Winged Helmets

2007 O-line

2007-01-24T11:25:00.000-08:00

On paper the 2007 offensive line should be better than the 2006 line. The main reasons it might not be would be:

1) If the coaches decide that Alex Mitchell is really an OT and move him to RT
2) Injury

#1 looks VERY doubtful as Mitchell is slower on his feet than Riley and honestly #2 would only be a huge blow if Jake Long was injured. All other positions have more depth than they did last year.

Thus, here is what the 2007 o-line should look like. The 'Key' explains things and the light yellow and bright yellow on LG and RT are my levels of worry for that position in 2007 (Nervous about RT for 2007 and a little nervous about LG in 2007, not worried about LT/C/RG, etc). Also, players that I don't expect to contribute are listed down below the main grouping.

LT: Long is a lock at LT and is really the only true 'lock'. Behind him would actually be Ortmann/Schilling instead of Zirbel as Zirbel has shown a lack of anything good (tripping during the Indiana game allowing a sack, allowing ND rushers right in, etc). I've listed Dorrestein in this column but he most likely won't see the field in 2007 thus he is down at the bottom.

LG: Boren looks to be the early favorite for this spot as he has more playing time than other potential candidates. Schifano would/could/should have been ahead of Boren IF not for his injury. I'm throwing Ciulla in here more just to put him in a slot as he might see slight time as a 3rd stringer.

C: Given Kraus's statements earlier about being more than open to moving to C in 2007 the most logical position for him is C. The only other slot would be LG but if your Carr wouldn't you rather have a 5-th year senior at C instead of a 3rd year soph with ~zero playing time? Especially since Kraus has ~8 starts at C already (2005). Behind him is the much hyped Moosman. When Jake Long talks about other o-linemen he talks about a) Ortmann and b) Moosman. The 3rd potential for C would be McAvoy but I'm moving him to RG.

RG: Mitchell looks to be a lock here but frankly I think he needs to re-earn a spot given his play late in 2006. Maybe that's being unfair but he looked either out of position or slow in a few 2006 games. I've put McAvoy behind him mostly because rivals current depth chart (updated 1/19/2007) lists him there.

LT: My opinion is that the RT position will again be a HUGE key for the Michigan offense. Riley at RT was good but not great. Well, I think a lot of folks would argue that Riley was horrible but he didn't do as bad as I expected. 2007 looks to be either Ortmann or Schilling. A lot of folks have Schilling as a lock for the RT position but I'm going with Rivals on this and putting Ortmann as the early favorite. Ortmann has generated a lot of buzz but nothing else and only saw a tiny bit of playing time in 2006. However, Schilling is still rehabbing from an injury and a few folks (including rivals it seems) have speculated that he won't be 100% by the time that the 2007 season rolls around. If, however, he rehabs 100% odds are that he takes the RT spot from Ortmann given his superior footwork and rumored ability to shutdown Woodley 1 on 1.

Others:
-Dorrestein will probably see backup time in 2008
-DeBenedictis is a rumored transfer possibility with odds of never seeing the field
-Gallimore is slightly better than DeBenedictis with a slight chance of seeing the field in 2007 unless I'm WAY off base
-Molk will redshirt and hopefully grow 2-3 inches ;)
-Huyge will DEFINITELY redshirt and hopefully hit the weight room hard

Thus we have 3 full starters returning plus a LG that started 1 game and had more than 4 additional quarters of full playing time.

Note: If anyone actually reads this blog anymore can you throw up a comment just to let me know? Thnx...

New recruiting/other posts on the way

2007-01-24T06:51:00.000-08:00

FYI, will hopefully get at least 1 new post up today. I've got a couple ideas such as:

-Michigan recruiting 2003-2007 spreadsheet
-ND recruiting spreadsheet
...

2006 Defensive UFR through NW vs. 2005

2006-11-01T13:28:00.000-08:00

2006 UFR -> Iowa

2006-10-26T12:33:00.000-07:00

In case anyone's interested, here is the UFR totals for defense through the IOWA game:

[The 2005 column represents the total points garnered by the defense in the 9 games that Brian charted. The 2006 column represents the total points garnered by the defense in all 8 games including the Iowa game.]

2006 1st game UFR

2006-09-05T11:40:00.000-07:00

Wow, what a difference Ron English makes! 12 for Woodley which ties the all-time UFR high set by Branch back in the 2005 Wisc game.

Also note that we don't see any -7's (Mason) or -5's (Massey) with the only real negative being Stewart (-3)

Night and day difference.

2005 4th quarter defense

2006-08-30T10:24:00.000-07:00

The media has come up with countless articles pointing to Michigan’s 4th quarter defensive woes as being the main culprit for Michigan’s 7-5 2005 season. However, a closer look reveals something different:

Game #1 [NIU]:
->0 3rd quarter points
->7 4th quarter points

However, the 4th quarter points were scored with 3:06 left in the game when Michigan had 2nd stringers on defense. UFR from mgoblog shows at least Taylor and Thompson in so definitive 2nd stringers in. Touchdown in the 4th quarter is meaningless.

Game #2 [Notre Dame]:
->0 3rd quarter points
->0 4th quarter points

0 2nd half points. Period!

Game #3 [Eastern Michigan]:
->0 3rd quarter points
->0 4th quarter points

Shutout. Enough said.

Game #4 [Wisconsin]:
->3 3rd quarter points
->17 4th quarter points

17 4th quarter points. Wow, this is definitely proof that Michigan's 4th quarter defense is the real reason for the suckyness of Michigan's 2005 season. However, a closer look at the 4th quarter is in order here:

->Starting on Wisc's 27, Wisconsin scores a FG
->Michigan fumbles on the 2nd play, allowing Wisc to start on Michigan's 12 yard line!!!!
->Wisconsin scores
->Chad Henne throws an interception on the 2nd play, Wisc starts on Michigan's 35
->Wisc throws an interception, Michigan ball
->Michigan TD
->Wisc punts
->Michigan goes 3-out, punts
->Starting at the Wisc 48, Wisc scores

2 turnovers by Michigan's offense in the 4th quarter. The 2 TD's that Wisc scores are right after a) a Michigan fumble on their 12yard line and b) Michigan goes 3-out. Change any one of those 3 things (fumble, fumble, 3-out) by having Michigan's offense perform a tad bit better and the game is a W for Michigan. Period. OR, actually, more importantly, have Michigan capitalize on one more of their NUMEROUS offensive chances in the 1st 3 quarters and Michigan wins.

This game was lost by Michigan's offense, not by the play of Michigan's defense.

Game #5 [Michigan State]:
->3 3rd quarter points
->7 4th quarter points

This game was a win. Holding high-flying Drew Stanton and MSU to 10 2nd half points is great. MSU scored 21 in the 1st half and only 10 in the 2nd and 0 in OT. This is a good 2nd half defensive performance by Michigans D.

Game #6 [Minnesota]:
->10 3rd quarter points
->3 4th quarter points

Only 3 points in the 4th quarter.

Game #7 [Penn State]:
->3 3rd quarter points
->22 [14] 4th quarter points

This game was a W but was rather ugly in the 4th quarter. 22 points, wow you say. However, 8 of those were not given up by Michigan's defense so that narrows it down to 14 points scored on Michigan's D in the 4th quarter. This game definitely deserves a closer look at the 4th quarter:

->Michigan goes 5-out
->Tony Hunt has a 61-yard rush leading to a PSU TD
->Michigan's offense gives up a touchdown to PSU
->Michigan TD
->PSU punts
->Michigan FG
->Michigan interception by Leon Hall, Michigan ball
->Michigan goes 3-out, punts
->Starting at their own 19 PSU drives 81yards for a TD
->Michigan scores with 1 second left

This game would count more towards outing Michigan's 4th quarter defense than any other game aside from the OSU game. However, the game was a W for Michigan. As well, 8 of the 4th quarter points scored by PSU were given up by Michigan's offense. As well, Michigan's offense squanders yet another chance after Michigan's D comes up with an interception. Going 3-out after a great Michigan D play doesn't do much to inspire the folks who have to trot right back onto the field.

Again, a W for Michigan so this game doesn't count for all those 4th quarter naysayers.

Game #8 [Iowa]:
->0 3rd quarter points
->3 4th quarter points

Only 3 points scored in the 4th quarter and 3 points in OT. Nice D. Sure, some of this was Iowa trying to play LLLlloydball but solid D nonetheless. Breakout performance by John Thompson helping to stuff Iowa's run game in the 2nd half.

Game #9 [Northwestern]:
->0 3rd quarter points
->0 4th quarter points

2nd half shutout. AGAIN. Where is this 4th quarter D dribble coming from?

Game #10 [Indiana]:
->0 3rd quarter points
->7 4th quarter points

Indiana touchdown with the score 41-7 Michigan. How many 3rd stringers were there on Michigan's defense at that point. Meaningless touchdown.

Game #11 [Ohio State]:
->0 3rd quarter points
->13 4th quarter points

OSU scored 12 in the 1st half and 13 in the 2nd with all 13 coming in the 4th quarter. This is against a very good OSU offense with Troy Smith firmly at the helm where he wasn't in previous games. A closer look reveals:

->OSU misses a FG try
->Michigan scores a FG
->OSU starts on their own 33 and goes 67 yards for the touchdown
->Michigan goes 5-out
->OSU goes 88 yards for a TD

The Ohio State game really is the only game that can even come close to counting towards any notion of Michigan having a bad 4th quarter defense. Taking a look at mgoblog's UFR of Michigan's defensive effort against OSU goes more towards showing what Troy Smith can do against a soft zone than anything else. Saying that Michigan lost the OSU game as a result of Michigan's 4th quarter defense would probably be 50% true.

Game #12 [Nebraska]:
->3 3rd quarter points
->15 4th quarter points

Wow, another 4th quarter meltdown by Michigan's D? 2 in a row you say? Let's take a closer look at the 4th quarter:

->Michigan scores a TD
->Nebraska punts on their ensuing posession
->Michigan goes 3-out and punts
->Nebraska returns the kick to Michigan's 38.
->Cory Ross scores on a 31yd TD on the 2nd play
->Michigan fumbles on the 1st play of the next posession
->Michigan's D forces Nebraska to a 3-out, Nebraska punts
->Chad Henne fumbles on the 2nd(?) play, Nebraska ball
->Deep in Michigan territory Nebraska scores

Nebraska's 1st TD came when they started already at Michigan's 38 yard line and Michigan's D was coming off an EXTREMELY short sit as Michigan just went 3-out prior to that series. Nebraska scored with Michigan already forced to defend in their territory with almost zero rest. Then add onto that the momentum of Michigan's offense fumbling RIGHT AWAY deep in Michigan territory. Singling out Michigan's 4th quarter defense here is the wrong thing to do. So aside from Michigan's 4th quarter Defense you have:

1) Michigan's offense fumbling deep in their territory allowing Nebraska to start their last scoring drive in the redzone
2) Michgan's offense fumbling in Michgan's territory
3) Michigan going 3-out right before Nebraska's 1st 4th quarter TD
4) Michigan's special teams allowing Nebraska to return the ball all the way to the Michigan 38 giving Nebraska a SHORT field to work with

Honestly, Michigan's D put up a tough fight but when your offense just flutters the ball away 3x in the 4th quarter holding Nebraska to 2 short-field TD's is pretty darn good. If Michigan's offense would've performed minutely better Nebraska doesn't score more than 1 TD in the 4th quarter and Michigan wins. Period.

Thus, there is only 1 game out of 5 (OSU game) that Michigan's 4th quarter defense can bear a decent chunk of the blame for the loss. Michigan going 11-1 with only a loss to OSU would've earned a top5 AP poll spot and no mention of problems with Michigan's D regardless of quarter. If, for some reason, you still need more proof that Michigan's D was not the problem last year see the post below.

Comments, flames, and/or contrary opinions on this subject matter are more than welcome.

The Real problem

2006-07-13T13:18:00.000-07:00

The real problem last year was Michigan's offense not the defense as so widely stated by the media. Why?:

-> Held Notre Dame to it's LOWEST point total for all of 2005 at 17.
-> ND was pretty consistently high scoring before/after us aside from the Fiesta Bowl.
-> ND offensive average was 38.18 pts/game, we held them to 17.

-> Only allowed 23pts against high flying Wisconsin (yes Wisconsin)
-> Wisc's offensive average was 35.33 pts/game, we held them to 23.

-> Held Minnesota to it's 2nd lowest point total of the year.
-> Minnesota's offensive average was 36.18 pts/game, we held them to 23.
-> Minnesota scored 31 points against the tough OSU defense.

-> Held PSU to it's 3rd lowest point total of the year.
-> PSU's offensive average was 35.18 pts/game, we held them to 25.

-> Held high-flying Northwestern to it's 2nd highest point total of the year. They were averaging 37.14 pts/game BEFORE they played us.
-> Northwestern scored 29 points against the tough PSU defense, we held them to 17.

-> Held OSU to it's 3rd lowest point total of the year behind 2 stalwart defenses, PSU and Texas

2006 Questions

2006-07-05T06:47:00.000-07:00

I'd like to take a quick interruption of my 'What makes a good X' posts to throw out what I believe are the top questions for the Wolverine team that will take the field in 2006:

1) Which Chad Henne will show up?

Simple question but the biggest. This has been asked earlier and is the biggest factor for the Wolverines in 2006.

2) Will the offensive line be better than last year? This question has to be broken down into multiple parts:

How will the line function as a whole? Will it gel?

This question has a lot to do with how Henne does this year. If the o-line has another rocky year then Henne will most likely follow suit.

Who will be the RT and how well will that person do?

I can't help but think that this is the biggest position question mark on the whole team. Kolo? Riley? Zirbel/Ortmann?

Can Bihl be more than just a filler at center?

Sure he "had a good spring" but can he bring that to game day?

Why does the formatting on blogger suck? Argh!!!

3) How much will our LB play improve this year?

It will be interesting to see the change between Herrmann and Szabo and what results that has on the field. Throw English into the equation here as well. We should field a good to decent front 4 and our defensive backfield should be good-great with only 1 unproven CB to get up to speed. That leaves LB play as the only real question for the 2006 defense. Even a small improvement over last year should reap big overall rewards in terms of defensive performance.

4) What impact will Ron English have on our Defense?

English will be scrutinized fiercely this year and hopefully there won't be any bloggers using the excuse "well, he did have to work within Loyd's framework" by the end of the year.

Honestly those are the main questions. The other positions seem to be taken care of:

-RB's: We should field a good stable of RB's that will be great if Hart stays healthy.
-WR's: Same thing. Mario, Arrington (my bet this year for a breakout season), Breaston, Tabb, Savoy, Dutch...
-TE's: Ecker, Massey, freakazoid Butler should equate to a good year.
-S: 5 returning starters.
-DB's: 1 good starter with 1 nickel-db with experience and 2 other good potential DB's (Stewart/Sears)
-DE's: Woodley, Jamison, Biggs (rumored to be much improved) should be good.
-DT's: Taylor/Branch should hold down the fort with Walton/McKinney/Johnson and possibly Slocum adding to the mix. This one could be tenuous if injury strikes but fingers crossed.

OG/C follow-up

2006-07-05T06:28:00.000-07:00

Taking a look at the 'What makes a good OG/C' post below, the end result was that for recruiting purposes there isn't a magic bullet based on recruiting stats. In a previous post, I stated that there didn't seem to be a single OG/C headed our way in 2007 but things have changed. There now appears to be at least 1 in that category: David Molk.

My impressions are that it will come down to West Virginia or Michigan for Molk and he looks to be deciding in the next few weeks. Hopefully he will stay closer to home and pick Michigan.

Molk is ~6'1" and 270lbs running a 5 in the 40. Overall he would fall into the first category of less than 300lbs and mobile. He looks to have a mean streak which is another trait that seems to come in handy for offensive lineman. He also blew up the Michigan camp and was seemingly the best offensive lineman there.

All-in-all I will be EXTREMELY happy if we can pick up Molk plus a decent OT. It would be even better if we can add John Elliott to the mix as well but I haven't heard much at all about him which isn't a good thing as there are usually at least whispers on folks looking to head to Michigan.

Updating my previous skepticism, it looks like we might be getting at least one of the Schwartz/Ziemba OT pair heading our way. Fingers crossed on that.

What makes a good OG/C

2006-06-13T09:11:00.000-07:00

Continuing the series, this article will focus on what makes a good interior lineman. I'll start off with a description of an interior lineman. This site has a somewhat decent description of a LG/RG:

On each side of the center are the guards, which are unimaginatively called the left guard and the right guard. These guys have two different possible jobs to do. If the quarterback has called a pass play, where he will try to throw the ball over a mess of very large guys who are all wrestling and hit a speedy receiver in full flight, then the job of the guards is to be large impenetrable walls and absorb any punishment the defensive guys care to put out. The guards are to form a wall with the center that the quarterback can stand behind, unmolested, while the quarterback tries to get the ball to the right person. If the football team spends most of their time passing the ball, the guards will tend to be very big guys, weighing perhaps as much as 325 to 330 pounds. These very heavy guys can't move as fast as somewhat smaller guys, but they can absorb a lot of punishment.

If the quarterback has called a running play, where one of the players will try to run with the football, the guards have their second job. In this case their job is to bull rush whoever is ahead of them and create a hole in the defense for the runner. The guards which are best at bullying a hole in the defense are just a bit smaller, perhaps 300 to 310 pounds, and a bit faster and more athletic. It's a very different job to run forwards a few steps while pushing a 320 pound defender than to stand more or less in one place and take whatever the 320 pound defender dishes out without moving or flinching.

Again, the purpose of this series is to look at stats to gauge potential recruits. Following the same lines, here is the list of all available data for guards/centers taken in the 2006 NFL draft:

Analysis:
1) There isn't anything in the stats above that really jumps out at you. Speeds and weights are all over the map. There are 2 2-star ranked players as well as a 3-star ranked player but the top 4 above were all 4-5 stars.

2) Most of the above players can be lumped into 2 categories.
a. Less than 300lbs and mobile
b. Greater than 300lbs and not so mobile.

It's interesting to note that the only lineman above with any mention of brainpower in his bio notes ("What he's been able to accomplish on and OFF the field...") was taken the highest in the draft.

Next: CB
Previous: What makes a good OT

OT follow-up:

2006-06-11T13:30:00.000-07:00

Taking a look at the 'What makes a good OT' post below, the end result was that for recruiting purposes, it seems that mobility on a good frame is the thing to look for. Let's take a look at the list of possibles for OT recruiting this year:

[First off, it looks like Darrell Davis-Bundanuro has dropped Michigan from his list of schools according to rivals so I've left him off]

As I seriously doubt that we have a shot at Stroter, the OT's that Michigan should really be aiming for this year are A#1) Ziemba and B#2) Schwartz. Why? Ziemba is easy. Good frame with good mobility combined with a proven track record. Schwartz looks to have improved down towards the 5.2's on his 40 during a recent outing and garnered positive reviews about his mobility. I'm also leaving Elliott out as I'm 98% sure that he will be a OG/C in college. After Ziemba/Schwartz comes Plouhar but at this point there isn't much info to go on for him. That pretty much leaves Vandermeulen and Pepper. Vandermeulen could be a sleeper but if he doesn't impress during camp next week he probably won't get an offer. Pepper wasn't on the initial list of campers that I looked at and might be closer to a 6 second 40 than a 5 second 40 with who-knows what kind of mental skills in the 'ol cupboard. So where does that leave us?

->Praying for Ziemba or Schwartz with Vandermeulen as the last-ditch backup.

Now take worst case scenario and combine that with last year and that gives you Schilling (5-star), Dorrestein (3-star but potential sleeper), and Vandermeulen (~3-star maybe sleeper) for a 2-year OT haul. Oh but wait, Schilling will probably move inside and provide a solid mobile kick-ass LG that can pull/etc.

Ryan Mallett better be hoping for Ziemba or Schwartz or else he's going to be praying for either:
a) Dorrestein and Vandermeulen prove to BOTH be sleepers
b) A 2008 uber-recruit (Sam Young + Josh Oglesby) that (really really) likes Meeechigan

Carr showed us all his recruiting brilliance landing Schilling near the 11th hour so there is reason to believe that things won't turn out as bad as I tend to make them out to be. That and there seems to be the good possibility of new recruits popping up (Dennis Ziegler??) As I said previously, if we get either Ziemba or Schwartz and Vandermeulen then this will be a good OT haul for the year. Actually, make that a great haul.

What makes a good OT

2006-06-09T11:36:00.000-07:00

The first of a new series of posts will focus on what makes a good football player for that position. First off is Offensive Tackle. What makes a good OT?:

First, this site does a decent job of describing what OT's are and what they must be able to do:

"On the outside of the guards are the two tackles, again called the left and right tackles. These guys have a very hard job to do. The tackles will often be the biggest guys on the football team - 6'6" or even more, 330 to 350 pounds. The defense is sometimes going to line up 320 pounds guys to try to bowl over the tackles. Other times they will line up a 250 pound speed rusher who will try to push off and run past the tackle. Other times they will line up a 180 pounds safety or cornerback who has near Olympic sprinting speed, and he will try to run around the tackle before he can move. The tackle gets no sympathy, it's his job to keep anyone from getting around the end of the line and to the quarterback, no matter how big and strong or small and fast.

Tackles are chosen to have very long strong arms so that they can reach out and stop guys. They must have very fast feet so that they can quickly slide left, right, or backwards as necessary to protect their quarterback."

However, I'm more interested in hard stats that can be used to gauge/measure potential OT recruits. Even more specifically, what can be used for layfolks like me to judge potential incoming college freshmen recruits? To that end, I've taken a list of all OT's taken in the 2006 NFL draft and listed their prep recruiting stats/bio taken from rivals.com (free information). [Note: rivals only has info on recruits from the 2002 season onwards so not all players drafted for that position will be listed, only the ones that had information on rivals.com.] That list, broken out into [Draft position, NFL team, Name, NFL Position, College Team, College Position, Rivals Rank (their rank for that year in that position), Rivals Stars, Height, Weight, 40-time, Bio notes rated 1-5 depending on notes in their bio that talk about their smarts, general awesomeness, and if they were all-state, all-conference, etc.] is here:

Analysis:
1) Speed
The first thing that jumps out from the data above is speed. Only 3 players were above 5.0
in the 40 and they were 5.1. As well, they were near or at the bottom of the list in terms of draft position AND Rob Sims taken at #128 has "good mobility" listed in his bio.

2) Height
Honestly, I would've thought that there wouldn't be any OT's below 6'5" but there are 3 at 6'4". Sure they could've grown a bit between prep and college but that's unlikely. There really doesn't seem to be any super gauge WRT height other than 6'4" and above.

3) Bio notes
All OT's had some kind of positive notes in their 'Bio Notes' section on rivals. This ranged from the OMG super wingspan note for D'Brickashaw Ferguson to 'Dominant' for Eric Winston, and other notes of effort/speed/god-like abilities. Well DBF had notes about agility, quickness, AND
wingspan.

Even taking a look at future OMG awesome tackles such as Joe Thomas you see speed stand out more than anything. Mobility on a good frame seems to be the biggest factor, from this standpoint, for successful OT's.

Next: OG/C

Reasons to be optimistic for 2006

2006-05-31T09:57:00.000-07:00

My reasons to be optimistic for 2006:

-> Tim Jamison
Even if Jamison only sees the field 1/2 the time he has the potential to be disruptive. Honestly, after watching 240lb Steve Davis crush our rushing game last year I have absolute and full faith that Jamison can handle the run.

Part #2 of this would be the fact that the depth chart on thewolverine.com now lists Jamison and Woodley as the starting DE's. That doesn't mean squat as it will probably change but it can't help but make a UofM fan hopeful.

-> Strong secondary
Yes, even with an unproven starer aside Leon Hall I am optimistic about our secondary in 2006. Adams looks to be ready to step up and shine and whoever lands the FS job should be more than adequate. I'm also confident that depth won't be an issue as we have more than enough safety's and with hall/stewart/trent/sears at CB we should be good even in nickel/dime packages.

-> DT
Just having Branch in the interior makes me happy. I'm overlooking the fact that he seemingly balooned from 311 to 330lbs recently and hoping that a lot of that is muscle. Either way he should be a strong force in the middle. I'm confident that Stripling will work wonders with Taylor in his 2nd year and have him using moves instead of just brute strength to actually utilize his strength to his advantage.

-> A healthy Hart
Not much else to say about this. The little dynamo is almost as fun to watch as Barry Sanders was back in the day. (Yes, I did say almost)

-> WR's and TE's
We should field a good contingent of folks that can catch the ball. I'm not counting my breath that Ecker, Massey, or Butler turn out to be good blockers but those 3 should compliment our solid WR corps.

-> Ron English
I didn't list these in any particular order but this one would probably be #1. He hasn't proved himself but I for one am extremely optimistic. And anyone who has read even one of my articles should know that I'm a cautious pessimist at heart so that's saying a lot.

-> Alex Mitchell
This might be stretching things a bit but I'm hopeful that after fall practice reports come out I will be even more optimistic about Mitchell at RG.

Pre-Camp recruiting compendium

2006-05-30T05:08:00.000-07:00

Things will hopefully become a lot clearer after camp (I think camp is June 15-18 [Ok, so it's June 18-22]) but before then here is the recruiting landscape.

The list to the right represents all recuits that I think have at least a shot of going to UofM. I've left off some recruits that I'm really really sure will go elsewhere. There are a number of recruits, notably OT's and OG's, that have BIG hints in their rivals or scout profiles that point them to other schools. When someone says he wants to stay close to home and is either on the East coast, West coast, or way down South he ain't coming to Michigan.

Where does this leave us? Well, in my humble opinion not in great shape. Perusing the list to the right the biggest topics are:

1) Offensive line:
Folks, we don't look good this year for O-line recruiting. At all. There just doesn't seem to be a single OG/C that looks to be headed our way. The closest might be John Elliott but he's wide open right now in terms of recruiting and he might truly be an OT. We might have to dredge the bottom of the barrel this year for inside linemen and that is truly a bad sign.

OT's don't look that much better. Sure, we still have a 'chance' at getting Ziemba or Schwartz but aside from those 2 the only good one is Plouhar but he's a wildcard. After those the quality drops off. VanderMeulen will definitely commit if given an offer and he probably will if he has a good performance at camp. If not, things don't look good at all for OT.

If we get Ziemba or Schwartz, Vandermeulen, and 1 decent OG (high 3-star or 4-star) then I will be amazed but EXTREMELY happy.

2) Great class only in a few positions
Right now our 'Superb wonderlicious best-EVER' recruiting class is really only at QB/DB and possibly WR. And we really don't know about RoJo yet. Even if we get RoJo and Dionte Allen we are still only good in a few positions. If we get Hughes we could possibly add RB to the list of good.

3) Some MAJOR holes
->If we don't get Barksdale then DT will be a GAPING hole.
->ILB has a really good chance of being a BIG hole.
->OG will most likely be a GINORMOUS hole.
->OT could easily be a big ole hole.

Summary: At the moment, this class looks great in a few positions and absolutely pathetic in others. And honestly, my take on recruiting is that what matters most, in order, is:

1) QB
2) A good balance across all positions with no real holes.
3) O-line, o-line, o-line
(The top3 above are a LOT more important than the next few)
4) DB's
5) LB
6) WR
7) D-line
8) TE
9) FB

Therefore, we look to have a recruiting class that only has 1 of the top3 important critieria for a good recruiting class. As I said earlier, things could change after camp but from where I'm sitting right now the landscape looks pretty bleak. Sure, we landed a top QB but where will he be when he's getting sacked left and right? Not having a couple good o-linemen easily diminishes the fact that we got Ryan Mallett.

Off-season random stats 1

2006-05-18T12:50:00.000-07:00

Well, it's 3+ months until the first kickoff of the season so what else is there to do but post a bunch of random stats. Today's edition is all about Michigan's o-line and stats taken from our trusty mgoblue.com. Taking a look at all current o-liners on the staff, grabbing 2 stats from their end of high-school days (bench press and 40-times), and compiling/sorting it gives you whats listed to the right.

[Keep in mind that the 40-times listed on mgoblue.com are sometimes a bit different than those listed on their rivals and scout profiles.]

However, one of the few observations that can be made from this random collection of stats is that it doesn't really translate into a list of good/bad players. For instance Pat Sharrow is at the top of both lists but is only competing for a backup spot and/or long snapper. Sure, injury is a factor there but his injury was back in 2004 and he only broke his foot. Plus, he actually played in 2005 which basically means that he's a non-factor for the rest of his UofM career.

Another item of note is that Kraus is basically at the bottom of the bench press list which is odd as he was one of the few o-liners to get any push last year.

Ortmann seems to be high on both lists and every UofM fan with a thewolverine.com account seems to be high on him so cross your fingers there.

Kolo seems to be a the bottom of both lists which could possibly explain why he's being trumped out of a OT position by a non-OT (Riley).

Gallimore also seems to be at the bottom of both lists which could possibly explain why he hasn't been anything but a 2nd/3rd teamer to-date.

It's interesting that the starting center and possible backup center are at opposite ends of the speed list. Bihl is the presumptive starting center with Moosman as the 2nd teamer. Sure, Kraus would probably fill in for any injury to Bihl but I'd have to say that Moosman is on a decent track for 2007 center.

What does this all mean? Nothing really but it does give fanatics like me something more to think about as we drone away the hours until the next kickoff...

Keys to the 2006 season

2006-05-10T07:22:00.000-07:00

Yes, it's a bit early but the keys to a successful 2006 campaign should not change much between now and September 2nd. That being said, the precursor to my 2006 keys is a quick review of the main problems in 2005. They are, in order:

1) Offensive momentum
My biggest gripe with the 2005 team was the offense, not the defense. I truly believe that if the offense would not have given the ball up so quickly (fumbles, 3-out's, etc) then we would've, at the very least, triumphed against Wisconsin, Minnesota and Nebraska. Even if the offense didn't score any more points the defense would have had 2 crucial advantages; rest and a more positive psychological momentum. Continually having to hop back on the field when your offense fumbles the ball or goes 3-out is a killer for defenses. If your defense is continually on the field your opponent is eventually going to score.

2) RT
One of the biggest factors in Chad Henne's performance was the lack of a decent RT. Kolo and Riley both got beat by most DE's including Eastern Michigan DE's!!! If we don't shore up the RT spot this year it's going to be a long campaign. Early looks don't look good at all. I just can't see either Riley or Kolo doing a great job.

3) LB play
Michigan only had 1 good LB last year in David Harris. Whoever wins the starting SAM and WILL spot NEED to step up and a) contain contain contain and b) provide more pressure on the QB. Actually, maybe we need to throw in c) stop shooting up the wrong gap but that would mostly apply to Graham. Either way, the LB's need to shore up run support for the 2006 defense to be more than mediocre.

Thus, the keys to 2006 are:

1) Hennebrain
Which Chad Henne will show up? Simply put, the success of the 2006 season rests in his hands. Period. If the Henne of early 2005 shows up the Wolverines are a 4-5 loss team. If the Henne that continued to improve near the end of 2006 shows up then we could go 9-3 with a bowl win or maybe even 10-2. If miracle of miracles happens and Henne single-handedly takes over a big game ala Vince Young style then we could go 11-1 or even 12-0. 'Big' games this year would be ND/PSU/OSU and possibly Iowa with ND/OSU being the biggest as both are in most folks pre-season top5.

Sure, all the offensive problems last year were not all Henne's fault. However, he is the biggest cog in the offense and he needs to step up and really run the show.

2) O-line
The 2005 o-line in general had a lot of problems and no, they can't all be blamed on injury. What happens if, god forbid, we loose Jake Long for the 2006 season? Is our front wall so weak that a single hole will cause everything to come crashing down? The left side of the 2006 season looks to be pretty strong with Long/Kraus holding thing down. Center is where things start to get dicey however Bihl has supposedly had a great spring. Unfortunately all talk about Bihl's performance can be summararily thrown out the window as his main problem is bringing that to Saturday. He was good in practice last year but that did not in any way translate to good game performance. RG will probably be Mitchell who is inexperienced and slow but is touted as being pretty good. RT is where things go to hell. If Kolo doesn't step up and win the spot we will most likely be stuck with Riley who is more than likely going to be beat by all good DE's. Folks mention that he did a good job against Tamba Hali but when you look at things he was beaten a number of times including giving up at least 1 sack to Hali. Corey Zirbel might be able to do a good job next year but I just can't see him being an effective RT this year. The same could be said for Ortmann.

My 2nd biggest hope for 2006 is that someone (anyone?) steps up and does a good job at RT.

3) LB play
Looking at the defense for 2006 the biggest concern is easily the LB spot. Barring a rash of injury the front 4 should be good. Woodley/Biggs/Jamison and even Germany should all see PT at DE. The only concern there might be bad coaching decisions to possibly play JVA more than they should (at all) or to limit Jamison's PT which would be a HUGE killer. At DT we've got Branch and Taylor who should be able to hold the middle of the line fairly well. I'm not sure how healthy Johnson is but Walton/Mckinney and possibly even Slocum should add to the 'at-least-2-deep' depth at DT. CB should be at least ok this year if not better than last year with Hall and then Stewart/Trent/Sears as the 2nd DB. As long as the practice hype for stewart/sears translates to the field we should be decent to good there including nickel/dime DB. SS looks to be all Adams this year with a good backup in Englemon if healthy. FS is a good question as my initial prediciton was Barringer but Mundy might be back and Harrison could even figure in there. Either way we've got at least 5 safety's with starting experience. This leaves the LB spot.

SAM looks to be between Burgess and Crable. Is Crable really good enough to take this spot? Sure, Burgess didn't seem to be all that impressive last year but I'm still skeptical about Crable. Either way it will come down to 1 of them. MIKE is a lock in David Harris with John Thompson providing a more than capable backup. WILL is Graham or Logan or even possibly Burgess. Burgess was a safety in HS so realistically as long as he's fast enough for pass coverage we might have Crable/Harris/Burgess on the field.

Either way all indications point to LB play as the biggest factor for the 2006 defense.

Riley Riley Riley

2006-05-08T10:01:00.000-07:00

According to mgoblue, Rueben Riley is now at around 6'4" 303lbs. Unfortunately mgoblue doesn't have any information on whether Riley can actually step up this year and show the needed ginormous improvement over last year to really be affective as the starting RT of which he is currently listed. However, a quick search of last years mgoblog archives gives us some information. Here is all relevant blurbs ordered by month on Riley from mgoblog:

December:
-Riley lets a blitzer through, forcing a Henne roll and throwaway. (TA)

November:
-When you’ve got a guy like Rueben Riley playing right tackle, you’re going to have problems running the ball and protecting the passer, and that’s what Michigan had to deal with for a bunch of weeks in the middle of the season. Riley’s probably not a bad fit in the middle of that line somewhere, but he just looked completely out-classed against some of the better defensive ends in the league.

October:
-Hali owns Riley and Henne has zero time to throw. (sack)
-Hart finds a cutback lane behind a beaten Riley as Ecker holds off Connor and Kraus kills Poz downfield.
-Screen is batted down. Riley doesn't really control his man. (BA)
-Screen is batted down. Riley doesn't really control his man. (BA)
-Tipped again; ominously, Riley just barely gets enough on the DE to push him past Henne. (BA)
-Riley gets destroyed by this Steve Davis kid, a freshman. At this point the elderly gentleman in front of me, who I do not know, turns to me and says "Is that Riley? Pathetic." I've got no response.
-Riley screws up his block, fouling this up and disrupting Thompson's blocking route. As a result the LB shoots up into the gap unmolested and makes a TFL.
-Neither Paul nor Riley gets anything approximating a block but Hart does it yet again.
-Riley gets shoved three yards into the backfield and Hart runs up his back.
-Riley has gotten pushed back several times but he is playing out of position with injured thumbs.

September:
-Ruben Riley has definitively proven that as a tackle, he makes a fantastic guard.
-Riley had trouble against Eastern Michigan.
-Riley, who gets beaten badly by the DE, who hurries the throw even though Riley held him.
-Riley beaten like something beaten a lot (insert domestic violence joke). (sack)
-Second incident of Riley being beaten by the EMU DE.
-Martin against cuts it up inside as Riley gets shoved back a bit.
-Kolodziej is still listed as second-team behind Riley, which is ominous because Riley had numerous pass-protection issues against Eastern. Eastern!
-Riley has to chop Abiamiri's legs out to open up the passing lane.
-Batted again. This is a three step drop, Riley has to get that guy's hands down.
-False start on Riley.
-False start on Ruben Riley

The good news is that the # of negative uses of the word 'Riley' seem to diminish as the 2005 season went along. However, that could be due to his moving to his natural guard position. As well, people talked up Riley's performance against Hali in the Penn State game but there are numerous negative reports on Riley for that game including at least 1 sack 100% on Riley. Sure, he had 2 broken thumbs for sections of 2005 but did he really improve?

Honestly, I just don't see a good 2006 season unless we can shore up the RT spot and quick. If the o-line doesn't have fall practice to gel we'll be RIGHT back in the same position we were in 2005.

Nebraska

2006-04-05T18:31:00.000-07:00

One of my semi-favorite pastimes is looking at and analyzing past recruiting classes. Having basically memorized UofM's past recruiting classes [2002+ as rivals/scout data doesn't go past that] I've turned to other universities. One team in particular just seems to beg for a more in-depth analysis. Or at least a bunch of hodgepodge words throw together on a football blog written by someone who had to take pre-english 101 as a UofM freshman. That team would be Nebraska.

[Note, the ramble of words below really only comes about as a result of a visual perusal of Nebraska's signing class and only rarely has actual real-world input (such as Carriker).]

Starting out in 2002, the first name that pops out is of course Adam Carriker:
Initial stats: 3-stars, 6'6", 235lb., 4.7sec 40
Now: still 6'6" but has packed on 60 pounds! That's right, 60 pounds. And still runs a 4.7 40.
Adam Carriker

Carriker just seems to embody exactly the type of player that college football coaches dream about recruiting. Someone who can come in with raw abilities/talent, and be sculpted into a 13-sack a year monster. There aren't a lot of folks out there that can pack on 60pounds of muscle AND keep the same 40 time.

Matt Herian: 3-star TE, 6'5", 220lb., 4.6 40
Matt's still 6'5" but now 245lb. A quick look at Matt's stats back in 2002 from someone with my experienced eye (mostly based on stats) really points to a potential all-conference TE. 6'5" is a nice height for a TE and the combo of 220+lb and 4.6 40-time really complete the package. I can point out a ton of TE's in the 2007 commitment lists that don't come close to those initial stats. Sure, the rivals/scout info (especially 40-time) don't always match real-world but still those initial stats have all the makings of a great TE if his coaches can do their job.

Jay Moore: 4-star WsDE, 6'4", 235lb., 4.5 40.
Jay is 280lb. now but holy crud, 4.5 in the 40? Even if he's now 4.6 that's still an insane speed for a 280lb. DE.

Andy Birkel: 3-star WR, 6'3", 180lb., 4.41 40.
Doesn't look like he's still around but a 6'3" WR that runs in the 4.4 range just visually looks like a great recruiting catch.

Corey McKenon: 3-star LB, 6'3", 210lb., 4.45 40.
LB with 4.4 speed? Corey tore up UofM last year with his speed and instincts. Corey is probably #2 on this list in terms of needing more words about him. Corey still runs like a 4.5 and is now 225lb. A 225lb. LB with 4.5 speed is absolutely fantastic. Package that with Corey's proven instincts and you get a GREAT 3-star steal on the recruiting side.

Lydon Murtha: 4-star OT, 6'8", 315lb., 4.9 40.
Just great stats for an OT. The 4.9 40 should indicate that he can move and with the kind of arms you find on a 6'8" body he 'should' turn out to be a great OT.

Barry Turner: 3-star WsDE, 6'3", 248lb., 4.5 40.
Holy bejesus, 4.5 in the 40 at ~250lbs? Not only that, but this is another case where visual perusal of #'s meets real-world action. Barry made Rivals 2005 freshman all-american team even though he was really only used as a pass-rusher on passing downs.

Ok, so the above is 2002-2005. Note that I've left out a ton of 4.4 speedsters that seem to all come from Juco-land.

2006:
Will Henry: 3-star WR, 6'6", 195lb., 4.5 40.
At 6'6" he's 5-6 inches taller than most DB's that he'll be going up against. 4.5 speed is about what Braylon Edwards has/had so Will has all the makings of a potential WR stud a-la Sydney Rice. If the coaching staff can beat into him proper route running then at the very least Nebraska's QB's will have a Braylon Edwards-esque jump ball bail-out receiver.

2006 also features a Juco-rich bevy of potential studs.

Overall the message I'm trying to convey is that Nebraska has a bunch of unhearalded recruits that not only have the potential for kicking ass but, in the case of a few (Carriker/McKenon/etc), are already kicking ass. I've left out a number of WR's and DB's that are 6'0" and above with 4.4 40 speed as their seem to be a number of them in past Nebraska recruiting classes. Plus, most of tohse again seem to be Juco. Next weeks assignment will be to do a quick Juco % for each recruiting class as that % for each Nebraska class seems to be in the range of 30-50%.

Pre-season 2006 top5

2006-04-04T11:41:00.000-07:00

In order to really make myself look like a fool it's time for me to throw out my pre-season 2006 top5 list. Most folks by now have thrown theirs out so it's high time I throw mine in the mix:

1) OSU
Yeah, hate to do it but I really feel that the defense is going to reload. With Larry Grant (best Juco LB last year) coming over and Laurinitais(sp?) and D'Andrea the LB's could conceivably be even better than last year. Probably not but it's possible. tOSU has more DB skill and depth than most teams. Plus the d-line returns 2 starters and has decent depth. Even if Troy Smith happens to get injured they do have Zwick as a nice 5-th year senior (i think) backup. Plus Pittman is set for a breakout year having what the quietest ~1300? yds last year. And Chris Wells looks set to contribute as a true freshman. Couple that with Tressel's blind eye towards alcoholic 6'8" 315lb. 5-star stud linemen and you've got the makings of a NC team.
2) LSU
Why? Um...probably Matt Flynn's performance against Miami.
3) Nebraska
What?!? Yeah, Nebraska. The why is that they just have a ton of 3-star studs like Carriker and others that are going to ride their 2005 bowl win to a great season. Plus Taylor seems to perform pretty well under pressure.
4) Florida
I'm not as sold on this as my other picks but had to throw someone in there. Didn't want to put USC (not sold on both sides of the ball), WVU (sophomore jinx for White/Slaton), Texas (I think QB will be an issue, sorry folks), Auburn (too many holes in the lines to fill).
5) Notre Dame
This probably hurts more than putting tOSU at the top.

Others:
Oklahoma: Just don't think Bohmar is going to be great this year.
Miami: A definite possibility as long as the new team comes together.
Georgia: Again, too many holes to fill.
Michigan: A possibility as long as a) henne isn't injured and is above ~65% b) the LB's get their act together c) the o-line doesn't contract strange illnesses and freak injuries and d) our DL gets decent pressure on the qb. So yeah, a 'possibility'.
Florida State: Another possibility and maybe more of a possibility than Michigan.

Bihl Bihl Bihl

2006-03-27T12:29:00.000-08:00

One discussion thread created by SP and particularly Carr's comments concerns Michigan Center Mark Bihl. He was only meh as a center last year standing in for an injured Kraus. He knows the system and can play the part but he really didn't seem to get any push much less refrain from getting pushed backwards himself. Carr has him penciled in as Center for SP but that could just be to give him his due shot (3rd consecutive shot since we tried him at center in 2005 AND 2004?) as he's only 1 of 3 5th-year seniors on the 0-line. However, I've been thinking about this a lot lately and here are some thoughts:

->His 'bio' on rivals states:
"Very athletic for an offensive lineman. Also starts at defensive tackle. Excellent strength. One of the top shot/track athletes in the state of Ohio."

Mark Bihl
With that, wouldn't you think that he'd be at least a decent center now as a 5th year senior?

->If height is his problem, what about uber-freshman Eric Wood who is also 6'5" and in-line with Bihl's weight:

Eric Wood

Eric Wood was Louisville's Center last year as a RS Freshman! He also made Rivals's 'Freshmen All American Team' last year. 2-star o-linemen starting their 2nd year at center. Maybe I just need to hook up with 'Doc Brown' and Back-To-The-Future my way to 2+ years from now, printout a copy of that years 'Freshmen All American Team', present it to Carr and convince him it's real.

Post Carr Presser 2006 Roster guess

2006-03-17T08:19:00.000-08:00

So this is what my guess is for the 2006 roster at this EARLY date. I'm still rather upset at the 'Bihl at center' implications and what that potentially says about Mitchell. Who knows. Things could (and usually do) change before September. Ok, I'm leaving Bass in at WR in the possibly optimistic hopes he's healthy in 2006.

Where does Crable fit is another big 2006 question. 3-rd down rusher?

Pre-SP 2006 questions

2006-03-06T09:13:00.000-08:00

Spring Practice will undoubtedly shed more light on most questions but until then here is my stab at what the main questions for the 2006 season will be:

In order:
1) What kind of defense will English run?
There are top-level questions such as will English have free reign or will he just assume the same yoke that Hermann had. We won't know until Sep but until then the question is, will it be a 3-4, 4-3, 4-2-5, etc? If we run a 3-4/4-3 then the biggest question is the Jamison question. If for some reason we see a 4-2-5 then there are too many questions to go through on a simple blog.

2) Who's center?
Most offensive questions stem from this simple question. If it's Kraus then most likely Riley and Mitchell are the Guards. If it's Bihl then the O-line should look like Kolo-Riley-Bihl-Kraus-Long. There has been talk about Ortmann displacing Kolo but I have to believe in Kolo securing the LT spot. At this point without firm answers to who's center the only lock on the O-line is Long at RT.

3) Jamison
Will Jamison start? To me this is the question that will make or break the defense. UofM w/out Jamison = cross your fingers. With his teleporting powers (and yes, the ability to stop the run) at WDE then the front 4 should be very strong. So it's either Jamison-Johnson/Taylor-Branch-Woodley or Woodley-Johnson/Taylor-Branch-?. Sure we've got 2 seniors (JVA/Biggs) on the SDE spot that could work out great but leaving Jamison's talents off the field will just detract from the defense's potential. Period.

4.1) Linebackers?
This is a multiple part question. First, will the linebackers that need to step up step up? Burgess projects as a starter alongside Harris as the only real locks even (I think) if we run the 4-2-5 option. Burgess needs to a) understand contain and b) keep contain at all times this year to really step in and be the player that folks hoped he would be last year. After Burgess the big question is Thompson/Graham? I think that one speaks for itself.
Either way you have to hope that the 2 changes (1=English, 2=Szabo) and the fact that all LB's are returning equals improvement. I'm sure many UofM pundits will be Tevo'ing their play excessively after the 1st 2 games trying to see if we have a shot at containing Darius Walker.

4.2) FS/SS
Well, it really doesn't matter but after reading Avant's quotes on Barringer I'm hopeful that he can come back healthy and really anchor the defense. After that it's a toss up between Englemon and Adams for the SS spot with Englemon possibly having the upper hand.

4.3) Wide Receivers after Breaston
Does it really matter? Manningham and Arrington are probably the fav's with Bass easily in the mix as well. Bass might play more as a specialty player with Breaston and MM/AA starting. Though, does it really matter with the depth at WR? Tabb is a senior this year and played well in 2005. Dutch hopefully will add to the deep threat potential of the offense and Savoy could be a clutch 'hands' freshman with almost BraylonEdwards size.

4.4) 2nd corner and Nickel
Hall is a lock and after him Trent is the favorite to secure the 2nd CB spot barring injury. Nickel currently looks to be between Sears, Stewart, and Richards with Hood thrown in there for folks who are optimistic. Actually, Harrison could fit in but this blog is going to assume that he will focus on FS. My current $$$ is on Sears as the Nickel with Harrison/Adams possibly helping out as the Dime DB when necessary.

5) Who starts at DT next to Branch
Does it matter? Johnson and Taylor will undoubtedly play a lot of minutes in 2006 barring injury. I'm anxious to see what McKinney can bring to the table as well. Actually, upon reflection, this question probably is more along the lines of 'Will Slocum qualify and add to the DT depth?'

2007 Recruiting, early wishes & wants

2006-02-22T09:53:00.000-08:00

The list to the left represents what I'd want to see signed for the 2007 class based on what I've read, seen, or heard. Keep in mind that this list will almost certainly change quite a bit between now and 290+ days from now when it's actually signing day again.

I'd say that my top 'wants' are:
Mallett
Oglesby
Barksdale
Johnson
Finch [Hopeful he can turn into a OLB that understands contain]

The Red by johnson just signifies a 'need' for the 2007 class with pink and yellow being lesser 'needs' overall. Probably should've made QB#1 red as well.

Coaching thoughts

2006-02-07T08:08:00.000-08:00

So by now everyone has heard that:

->Malone is out as OC, Debord is in as OC
->Ron English has left for da Bears
->No real news on Herrmann or who will replace English

The rivals.com message board has collapsed into a more-than-normal state of meltdown with dire predictions of 3 or more losses as long as DeBord and his bland offensive schemes are running the show. The media frenzy stating that Michigan is headed back to the 1997 glory days with DeBord at the offensive helm have yet to appear though most are expecting them at any moment. My thoughts are as such:

1) English was a great recruiter especially on the west coast and seemed to instill sound fundamentals in the DB's. I'm not sure how well he would've fared as DC if given the opportunity but a) he would be a good change from Herrmann and b) he would probably have a more agressive defensive stance which Michigan desperately needs at this point.

2) No real solid thoughts on Malone but I seemed to question a good deal of his 2005 playcalling.

3) I'm going to give DeBord a chance. Well, maybe a chance with the expectation of failure.

September is stacking up to be a BAD month for me. Being out of state I'll have to watch the games at a sports bar and my ulcer is assuredly going to suffer repeated pints of something other than Bud Light to assuage my frayed nerves. Isn't it bad enough to have to worry about which Henne will show up in September much less how he'll do with a new potentially vanilla offensive scheme?

Like most anxious fans I'll have to wait and see how things play out. SL leaving will certainly play a role in 2007 recruiting and adds another worry to the list. Looking at the 'possible' starters next year there is tons of potential. Jamison, Mitchell, Sears, and others could really step up and contribute but with a poor gameplan on either side of the field we could easily go with 3+ losses. Ug.

Recruiting Update

2006-01-20T12:25:00.000-08:00

Why do I seem to be the only one worried about the lack of SS recruiting in the last few years. Adams, Englemon, and Campbell seem to be the only 3 that we've got and they all have Jr. eligability next year. So if we don't bring in a SS this year, the SS's we bring in next year will have exactly 1 year to learn from them.

2006 Recruiting thoughts/predictions

2006-01-03T14:27:00.000-08:00

This wouldn’t be a blog without predictions that folks can laugh at down the road would it?

Ferrara: John looks to be future DT material as I just can’t see him at DE with his physical stats. Have to say that he will be 2nd string material.
Slocum: Early prediction that Slocum will be a major force during the 2007 season and probably play as much in 2006 as Taylor/Johnson did in 2005.
Banks: Film didn’t look that great at least what I looked at. Another future Biggs.
B. Graham: Going to go out on a limb and say that he will have personal issues (aka Watson/Woods/etc) but will show up in 2007/2008 and be a monster.
Mixon: Going to say that Mixon will be a solid LB and exceed expectations.
Patilla: Will be a good backup OLB.
S. Brown: Prediction that Harrison will end up at CB and Brown will own the FS position by 2007.
Boren: Going to be solid.
Dorrestein: Another out-on-a-limb predition that this guy will turn out to be a very good OT. Starter LT and possible starter RT by his 3rd yr.
Cone: Folks seem to think that Cone will get passed by and not factor much in UofM offense ever. I agree.
C. Brown: Will contribute more in 2006 than Grady did in 2005.
Ezeh: Starting FB by his Jr season.
Matthews: Meh. Um, no Braylon but will probably end up starting by his senior year.
Wright: Future 85% FG kicker.

All I want for Christmas... 3-Star recruits

2005-12-17T16:11:00.000-08:00

Did you notice that all of the Butkus award finalists this year were 3-star recruits?
A.J. Hawk:
Demeco Ryans:
Paul Puzluzzzz...:

As well, there are a bunch of other noteable 3-star recruits:

Nagurski award winner Elvis Dumervil:

(interesting that all 4 players above were listed at 4.6 speed in the 40)

Others:
NW standout Tim McGarigle:
Minn o-line stud Mark Setterstrom:
Michigan's only good LB in 2005 David Harris:

What does it really mean? Probably nothing more than the fact that stars/rankings don't really tell the whole story.

2006 Roster comments, defense

2005-12-13T09:08:00.000-08:00

I've updated the image below in the 'Thoughts on 2006 Roster' for the defense. Biggest questions in 2006 are:

1) Who will be the nickel DB?
2) Who will be the 2nd DT next to Branch (Calling it a 4-3 defense)
3) Will linebackers not named Harris step up in 2006?

Thoughts:
-On #1, what about putting Harrison and Adams out as the nickel/dime DB's? Didn't adams go on as the 4th DB in some instances in 2005? The other options are somewhat limited as Stewart/Hood seem to be locks for the 'coulda shoulda woulda' award and have only garnered verbal abuse from Carr. Who knows, maybe they step things up big time in practice before next September. Sears seems to be starting some buzz concerning his chances for seeing the field in 2006. My early prediction is that Sears sees some time in 2006. Either way barring injury to Englemon/Adams I don't see Brown in the CB mix for 2006.
-On #2, Johnson did start at DT in 2005 but Taylor had some good showings especially against Minny. The questions here are a) will slocum be on the team? and b) where does McKinney fit? Either way we should have a good rotation with Branch/Johnson/Taylor/Slocum and possibly McKinney.
-On #3, I'd have to agree with brian@mgoblog's comments that given the #'s Burgess definitely has potential. However, that seemed to be the case last year given his Rose Bowl performance vs. Texas. Honestly, I have to believe it comes down to mental attitude. If Burgess is focused and adopts enough of the AJ Hawk 'not going to be caught dogging it on any play' attitude I have hope for him in 2006. Graham however is a different story. I among others had high hopes for him after his NIU performance but he seemed to go the other way. Will he improve in 2006 or will he be passed by Thompson or even B. Graham for that matter?

Early Predictions:
-Jamison and Crable will find their way into the lineup more and more in 2006
-Sears will see meaningful time in 2006 possibly even as the nickel/dime DB
-The strongside DE spot will have problems early in 2006 (please PLEASE prove me wrong)

2005 Season, UFR totals

2005-12-09T07:17:00.000-08:00

Brian from mgoblog (mgoblog.blogspot.com) has a weekly UFR (Upon Further Review) section that he updates after every UofM game with further analysis of both the UofM offense and defense. For the defense, he even assigns +'s and-'s to each player. Being highly addicted to UFR (and mgoblog in general), I've put together a summary below:

Top 5 defensive players based on this data:

1) Branch
2) Woodley
[Would probably be #1 if not for the arm injury]
3) Harris
4) Watson

Worst 5:

1) Massey
[Did you have any doubt?]
2) Adams
3) Graham
4) Van Alstyne
5) Hood

2006 Roster comments, offense

2005-12-02T08:15:00.000-08:00

Click on the image below in the 'Thoughts on 2006 Roster' and it will pull up a larger image that you can actually read. Anyone listed in orange I consider a lock for their position in 2006 barring injury. Anyone listed in light orange is a probable lock.

O-line: The o-line was one of the biggest dissapointments for the 2005 season. Things look good for 2006 but then again they looked fantastic going into the 2005 season.

RT: Long has a lock here based on Carr's comments hinting at not moving him. Basically having a good strong side Tackle.

LT: Kolo has a probable lock given experience/etc.

Backup for Long/Kolo is up in the air. Gallimore? Zirbel? Hopefully Zirbel turns out to be a good tackle. Gallimore might project into a guard down the road however leaving Zirbel, McAvoy, Ortmann?

C: Either Kraus or Bihl. I'd prefer Kraus based on who is a better center but this is still a question mark. With Bihl having started at center Carr might put Bihl there and Kraus at RG for more experience on the line.

RG: Mitchell/Kraus are probables based on who Carr sticks at center. I'd prefer Mitchell given the buzz around him, his playing time in 2005, and the fact that Kraus is a much better center than Bihl.

LG: Riley is as much of a lock as you can get based on Carr's recent comments and him most likely being there for the bowl game.

Overall things don't look that bad for the o-line. It'd be nice to get comments on this especially what folks think about both the center and RG positions.

TE: Ecker is a lock. Massey has had playing time and could be good down the road.

WR: Breaston an easy lock
Not sure who is going to make the next cut as Arrington was the presumtive 3rd string this year before injury and Manningham's experience and talent. Either way we are stacked at WR.

QB: Not much to say...

FB: Paul/Thompson probably depending on summer practice/etc

TB: Hart solid lock.

The real questions are on the o-line especially center and RG. Also, could be interesting to see who manages to pull ahead on the o-line depth chart in 2006. There was a rivals post about moosman possibly moving up to 2nd string based on how well he's coming along but he would presumably have to hurdle other folks like possibly ciulla/mitchell/etc. What about sharrow? Where does he fit in if anywhere? debenedictis? Is Zirbel going to step up and be a solid backup at RT/LT?

Thoughts?

Thoughts on 2006 Roster

2005-12-02T08:13:00.000-08:00

Comments shortly.

Intro

2005-12-02T07:46:00.000-08:00

Ok, just getting started. Hopefully will have something within the next few days.