2023 Starters: Cornelius Johnson, Roman Wilson
Losses: Darrius Clemons (Oregon State), Johnson (NFL), Wilson (NFL)
Returning players: Eamonn Dennis (RS Sr.), Peyton O'Leary (RS Jr.), Tyler Morris (RS So.), Karmello English (So.), Frederick Moore (So.), Semaj Morgan (So.), Kendrick Bell (RS Fr.)
Newcomer: Channing Goodwin (Fr.)
Projected starters: Morris, Morgan
For some teams who play three and four wide receivers on every down, losing two senior wide receivers might not seem like a huge deal. So in the context of college football, the departures of Cornelius Johnson (47 catches, 604 yards, 1 touchdown) and Roman Wilson (48, 789, 12) might not seem like a huge deal. Johnson was the large-ish possession receiver, and Wilson was the speedy deep and intermediate threat. And then there were usually a couple tight ends roaming all over the place. Altogether, Michigan got just 47 other receptions from receivers not named Johnson or Wilson, and 3 of those came from Clemons, who is now plying his trade for the Beavers.
Based on playing time and targets last season, the two front-runners for starting roles in 2024 should be Morris and Morgan. Morris started four games - so he's kind of a returning starter, I guess - and made 13 catches for 197 yards and 1 touchdown. But that one touchdown was a huge, key play when he got matched up against a linebacker against Alabama in the Rose Bowl and caught a crossing route for a 38-yard touchdown. Meanwhile, Morgan caught 22 passes for 204 yards and 2 touchdowns, and he also had an 87-yard punt return against Iowa in the Big Ten Championship game. He showed some downfield receiving chops in high school, but so far he's been more of a catch-and-run guy with jitterbug moves - witness his screen catch for a TD against Washington - and adding in 4 carries for 67 yards and 2 touchdowns.
Last year's spring game star was walk-on Peyton O'Leary (2 catches, 13 yards, 1 touchdown), who could factor in more this season if Michigan needs a big possession guy at 6'4" and 190 lbs. Frederick Moore (4 catches, 32 yards) and Karmello English (1 catch, 6 yards, 1 touchdown) will also factor in somehow. Some people think Moore could be the fastest player on the team.
Players with less of a chance to make an impact include fifth year senior Eamonn Dennis (who has yet to make a catch in his career but plays a lot of special teams), Kendrick Bell (who was a high school quarterback until making the position switch last year), and early enrollee freshman Channing Goodwin. Bell's brother Ronnie is now a wide receiver in the NFL with the 49ers, and Goodwin has some good bloodlines, as his father was a lineman for Michigan and in the NFL. But it's unlikely that any of them play a huge role in 2024.
Nice post! There's a lot of opportunity with Johnson and Wilson gone. I think Morris / Moore / Morgan are going to eat up the vast majority of snaps from that duo.
ReplyDelete1. Morris
2. Moore
3. Morgan
4. Bell
5. English
6. O'Leary
That's my best guess pecking-order at WR as of March, pending portal recruiting. I do hope they bring in an addition downfield threat to pair with Morris and Morgan (last year's top 2) but if not I think it's Moore "starting" spot to lose.
Morris is the clear WR1 in my mind. Was getting meaningful snaps as a freshman. I would guess him getting more playing time against TCU played into Andrel Anthony transfer decision. Last year he had 348 which is about what Donovan Edwards got (373)* and more than other fringe "starters" Bredeson and Hinton. Obvious breakout player for 2024, IMO.
Morgan could be argued as #2. He had 141 snaps on O compared to Moore's 107 but that doesn't really tell you the story. Morgan's came late in the year in the most meaningful context while more of Moore's came early in the year in mop up duty. Still, I wonder how much the coaches trust him yet to move beyond the slot WR role -- which Edwards and our TEs will also chip in at. If Michigan had a slot veteran like AJ Henning on the roster maybe Morgan's role is minimal and if they don't have Cornelius Johnson - maybe Moore's is maximized.
Since Johnson and Wilson are the ones who are departing, it seems like the biggest opportunity is sitting there for Moore to step into given the skill fit. It was encouraging that he played as much as he did as a true freshman, as it was for Morgan. I'm skeptical of hype of tall WRs who look the part, but there's a decent chance Sherrone wants a guy who fits that physical mold. Moore also probably sent Clemons (74 snaps) packing, so that's something.
Bell seems like the other option on the current roster. He's going to be more raw given the position change so I don't see him starting really, but a potential contributor given he's taller than his big bro and might be one of the top non-transfer options. There might be more room for Bell to surge forward if he can transition to WR, which I think won't be so easy. But hey - Ronnie Bell's 6'3 brother making a move to WR sounds interesting... and opportunity is there.
Payton O'Leary played 38 snaps on the year. A total 3 (all against Iowa) after MSU. People seem to like him though. He's been getting talk for 2 years now after spring games and maybe 3rd times the charm? I'm kind of skeptical and found his success last spring to be more worrisome than anything else (in regard to our backup secondary).
English has been getting good practice reports all along and got in 66 snaps as a freshman. I'd put him over O'Leary as well. The other options are not particularly exciting at this point.
*Interestingly nobody considers Morris to have had a disappointing season. Two backups who played a similar amount but very different expectations and evaluations of their play. I guess Edwards is a year older, that must explain it LOL.
"Interestingly nobody considers Morris to have had a disappointing season."
DeleteIt's not really that interesting. Morris averaged 15.2 yards/catch, which would rank #4 in the Big Ten if he got the ball enough to qualify. Edwards ranked #23 in the conference in yards/carry.
It's also a team where Michigan's leading receiver averaged 3.1 catches/game, which ranks #23 in the Big Ten. The offense isn't built to showcase receivers.
Of course, you know all this stuff...you just like to start arguments for no reason.
Run first, run often
Delete#harball
Oh and here I was like a dummy thinking Amon St Brown is a better WR than Josh Reynolds and Kalif Raymond but lo, it looks like based on yards per catch I was a true fool. LOL.
DeleteYards per catch is not a very popular metric people use in assessing WRs. Yards per carry is for RBs. Of course you know this Thunder. This is literally the first time I've heard of anybody talk about the relevance of Tyler Morris' yards per catch. Semaj Morgan average 9.3 ypc and Fredrick Moore averaged 8.0 ypc and nobody, rightfully, gives a flying F.
Edwards got over 700 yards in a backup role. Morris had less than 200 in a backup role. Neither is remotely disappointing because it wasn't their role to do more than that.
This is not an argument it's an observation. These backups are projected to do much bigger and better things next year, by everyone, because their role is projected to change. They've played and they've played well and the guys ahead of them are gone and so they are next man up. RB1. WR1.
Edwards YPC is going to be what it is and Morris' is going to be whatever it is and it will not matter to the team or how many games it win or how good they are as players.
The main difference is that Edwards was expected (by some*) to perform like a starter because of he closed 2022 as a starter (due to an injury). If Corum had stayed healthy in 2022 this wouldn't be a Edwards narrative that existed. If Corum had gotten hurt in 2023 again this wouldn't be a Edwards narrative that existed. Morris is an example of that - he was a backup who stayed a backup as the starters ahead of him stayed healthy the whole way through.
I'm commenting on the difference in perception compared to the similarity of roles and snaps. If that's an argument to you that's fine - I don't mind.
Practicing good sound self awareness today I see.
DeleteCan't win an argument so resorts to insults. JEverytime.
DeleteEverytime!
DeleteWhat about this guy? https://247sports.com/player/imarion-stewart-46103346/
ReplyDeleteUnless he ran into some admission troubles, he should be on board in the fall.
It's a spring football preview. Stewart doesn't arrive until the summer.
DeleteD'oh. Sorry for the oversight.
DeleteLosing an NFL QB and two NFL WRs - three in the last two years - is going to allow defenses to focus a lot more on Loveland
ReplyDeleteWe desperately need another playmaker on O for another playoff run
Man if only there was an elite playmaking talent somewhere else on this offensive roster.
DeleteI said "another"
DeleteNot gonna build a playoff offense with just a TE and then a Boom-Bust RB1 ... need a QB, WR and a game plan that covers our inexperience & lack of elite talent
Roanman is right about Wallace as RGC. That would benefit The Don, behind a brand new OL and a passing game that will be questionable
Someone is going to have to step up ... not sure why that would be controversial
" just a TE and then a Boom-Bust RB1 " is not an accurate description of the michigan offense.
DeleteNot sure why anyone is arguing this kind of garbage coming off a natty. But hey if you are into dissing Alex Orji, Donovan Edwards, etc. I guess this is the mindset...
Why not? Who else is established?
DeleteYou can look at last year and say Alex Orji didn't attempt a pass as a sophomore and so he never will and therefore we can't possibly have a playmaker at QB. You can look at last year and say Donovan Edwards is just a boom bust RB who averaged 4.2 YPC so he can't possibly have a playmaker at RB. I guess those things are just established facts to some. And then concluded "We desperately need another playmaker on O" because we don't have any beyond Colson Loveland.
DeleteOr you can pay attention, consider context, and understand that the Michigan team is in pretty decent shape for making the playoffs for the third year in a row. Even if it's taking a big step down on offense relative to last year.
Did Donovan Edwards look like a playmaker when he was thrust into a starting role to you? You'll have to remind me which team he transferred to.
Strawman, another of LyinLank's misleading strategies
DeleteI didn't say Orji would never pass, nor did I say we cannot have a playmaker at QB ... I'm saying we do not have an established playmaker at QB or WR, and that our OL is brand new, across ea spot
Try a good faith exchange ... just once
"We desperately need another playmaker on O for another playoff run"
DeleteGo ahead and search this page for the word "established" and see where it shows up. Right around the time someone wants to play dodgeball.
Who is lying? JEverytime. The confession master.
"another," as in "in addition to" ... is Orji a playmaking QB? Is he even the starter? No Lank, no to both
DeleteCheckmate, again
Who said I don't like Orji?
DeleteWho said Edwards needs special treatment?
LyinLank, just can't help it!
Receipts up top. The Michigan Wolverines are desperate!
DeleteLOL. JE knows he's stuck in another dumb ass take so it's time to duck dodge change subjects and insult.
But all he does is insult himself.
Everytime!
Dodging the question
DeleteOutsmarted, again
Receipts up top. Confessions below.
DeleteWhat receipts? Referring to your low expectation for Edwards? What's that prove?
DeleteGo ahead and search this page for the word "established" and see where it shows up. Right around the time someone wants to play dodgeball.
DeleteYou started with a dumb comment about our offense having a "desperate need" and then clarified to a neutral uncontroversial one (that we don't have established players at QB and WR).
Maybe that's what you WANTED to say, but you didn't say that. And instead of just clarifying -- yeah Don Edwards is another established playmaker too -- you dodged, lied, and argued for no reason.
"I said another" <-- yes after only listing Loveland, not mentioning Edwards
"I said established" <--- you did not. you d__b liar
The receipts are the quotes. Of what you said.
is Orji a playmaking QB? Yes
DeleteIs he even the starter? Probably JE.
"No Lank, no to both"
Yes, yes to both.
Wrong again. With quotes. No links (this time) but I know that doesn't persuade you so I'll just stick to the fact that Alex Orji was subbing in to the national championship winning top 10 ranked Michigan offense specifically to MAKE PLAYS and that people like Sam Webb are projecting him to be a starter.
Do we have a proven playmaker at QB? Do we have an established playmaker at QB? NO to both
DeleteWe have Denegal who threw a TD pass in garbage time, Orji who had only need allowed to run (in 29 Games), and Tuttle who passed them both within weeks of arriving on campus
*protecting as Starter does NOT make anyone a proven/established playmaker. It's. Purely speculation
Remember when I said search for the word "established"?
DeleteNow search for "proven playmaker"
This is moving the goalposts JE. This is a strawman.
You are very bad at this.
Another day another L.
To spell it out for you, because apparently that's necessary.
DeleteYou went from:
"We desperately need another playmaker on O"
to talking about having
"proven/established playmaker at QB"
You went from talking about 10 positions (in the context of Loveland) to honing in on 1. You went from playmaking to ESTABLISHED playmaking.
and STILL you're wrong. Orji......made plays........at QB.....on a national championship team. Making him.....a proven playmaker at QB.
Is Orji a proven starter -- no. He has never started a game and he has hardly thrown the ball in college games! But making plays? He can certainly do that. Watch the games. LOL I know you do -- watch them without your blinding biases.
You can't though. LOL
Not built for this.
Hold your Ls.
This is preview thread Lank, with expectations based on previous seasons performance ... established ... proven
DeleteI said we need "another" as in, we have limited options AS I LISTED LOSSES AT QB (and WR)
But go ahead, pretend THIS is your point. Misleading is your lie, and LyinLank is your name
"expectations based on previous seasons performance "
DeleteLOLOL How'd that work out for you with Don Edwards?
If you don't consider the context you miss the plot. You don't and you do.
We've got a bunch of playmakers on this team -- proven playmakers. They will step up into bigger roles just like Don Edwards stepped up in 2022 when given the opportunity to start. This is what happens in college football always - guys graduate and the backup steps up and sometimes he's better and sometimes he isn't but production depends on role. We didn't miss Hassan Haskins at all after he left.
What do you mean? What Edwards prediction did I get wrong? Reeeaching again?
DeleteYes, context: you're insisting we have a bunch of playmakers, but compared to what? Last year's team? ohio? Oregon? Texas? Sparty? What context Lank?
In the past you have blamed Tennessee's drop in offensive explosiveness & production on the loss of a 3d Rd QB but now you're saying that in CFB, someone ALWAYS steps up ... which is it? If that were true, wouldn't dynasties last forever? Not even YOU agree with you Lank
Let me know which of the following players did NOT make plays last year?
DeleteSemaj Morgan
Tyler Morris
Donovan Edwards
Alex Orji
Colston Loveland
Max Bredeson
I got at least one for any and all of them off the top of my head -- I can just go off the last 2 games in the playoff if you like?
Context: "I got at least one for any and all of them ... "
DeleteOut of how many plays in the season Lank? Compared to last year's starters - who had season's worth of demonstrated playmaking? Compared to our opponents? Context matters Lank, so you dodge
Outsmarted, again. Case closed
I see we're writing Case Closed in every post now. LOL.
DeleteJEverytime.
As a reminder, Case Closed first came up when JE said Joe Milton needed to go to D3 to start after 2020 and instead he transferred to Tennessee and started the first game of 2021. Case closed.
Except then JE tried to take different trials to different court (is he a GOOD starter though!)... and lost again. Another Case Closed.
Now JE wants to argue that Joe Milton isn't good enough to be a day 1 or 2 selection in the NFL. That case is still open, but JE doesn't even know I'm on his side this time. LOL. I really have to ask myself if I'm not wrong given that.
"who had season's worth of demonstrated playmaking"
is JE's attempt to start a new topic. Yet another dodge and duck from the self-described competitor.
It's him taking the L, trying to hide it, and trying to move the goalposts and distract from the topic at hand.
Real competitors don't run JE. And you can call yourself smart all you want JE. Nobody buys it. Not even you.
You're not built for this. Go tell the guys at the suburban Sacramento Rec Center. They love their local Al Bundy. No they aren't laughing at you, it's just a joke, relax.
"Not gonna build a playoff offense with just a TE and then a Boom-Bust RB1 ... need a QB, WR and a game plan that covers our inexperience & lack of elite talent"
DeleteThis case is OPEN JE. I'll let you know when it's closed. But for a guy who has lost EVERY case I'm not sure you're going to like where this ends.
Shhhh ... you've been outsmarted
Delete#caseclosed
http://touchthebanner.blogspot.com/2024/03/2024-spring-football-preview-running.html
Posting on multiple threads. Sad fantasy.
DeleteWe have had some great receivers go through Michigan with a lot of great catches.
ReplyDeleteCarter's catch with no time left vs Indiana is probably at the top of the list.
BUT, that Wilson catch against Bama where he jumps 15ft to catch that tipped ball has to rank up there because of the game, the time in the game, and impact.
@ Lank 3:31 p.m.
ReplyDeleteThe point is that Tyler Morris came in and did good things when it was his turn to play. He caught the ball, and he did good things with it. There was no point this year where people looked at Tyler Morris and said "Gee, he's not playing well."
Donovan Edwards came in and people said, "Gee, he's not playing well." Primarily because he wasn't playing well.
Thus, Morris was not a disappointment, and Edwards was. It has nothing to do with the stars, at least not for me.
Personally, I think the flip side is also true. And that is, if C.J. Stokes or Tavierre Dunlap had been the primary backup in 2023 and had come in to average 3.3 yards/carry and do virtually nothing for the first 3/4 of the season, you would not have defended Stokes/Dunlap as vehemently. And lots of people would have been clamoring to give someone other than Stokes/Dunlap a shot because Stokes/Dunlap were not being productive in their time on the field.
This is not an offense where backup receivers are expected to catch many passes.
#4 WR in 2023: Morris, 13 catches
#4 WR in 2022: Anthony, 7 catches
#4 WR in 2021: Baldwin, 17 catches
#4 WR in 2019: Black, 25 catches
#4 WR in 2018: Martin, 11 catches
#4 WR in 2017: Black/McDoom, 11 catches
#4 WR in 2016: McDoom, 5 catches
#4 WR in 2015: Harris, 6 catches
Nobody's making a big deal about Morris's lack of involvement because it's basically right on par with every other year's #4 guy. Less than Black and Baldwin, more than everyone else.
Now let's look at #2 RB:
Delete#2 RB in 2023: Edwards, 497 yards, 5 TD, 4.2 YPC
#2 RB in 2022: Edwards, 991 yards, 7 TD, 7.1 YPC
#2 RB in 2021: Corum, 952 yards, 11 TD, 6.6 YPC
#2 RB in 2019: Haskins, 622 yards, 4 TD, 5.1 YPC
#2 RB in 2018: Evans, 423 yards, 4 TD, 5.2 YPC
#2 RB in 2017: Evans, 685 yards, 6 TD, 5.1 YPC
#2 RB in 2016: Evans, 614 yards, 4 TD, 7.0 YPC
#2 RB in 2015: Johnson, 271 yards, 4 TD, 5.0 YPC
Out of 8 seasons, Edwards ranked #5 in yards and #4 in touchdowns - which are counting stats - despite having 15 games to reach those numbers. And he ranks dead last by a wide margin in yards per carry, with the closest being Drake Johnson.
We're not making this stuff up, Lank. Edwards did not have a good 2023 season - other than the fact that he played on a national championship-winning team, which all 135 players can say.
We have this debate about "not playing well" before, and you are making it up.
DeleteOut of 9 Harbaugh seasons, Edwards had the #2 most productive season by any backup RB.
2023 - Edwards had 780 yards
2022 - Edwards RB2 for 8 games and..... RB1 for 3 games -- where he got half of his season's production in. He was not just RB2.
2021 - Best RB2 season in Michigan history by Corum, the best RB in Michigan history. 1,100 yards! Corum, better than Edwards, stop the presses.
2020 - Not listed here, but you reference 2020's relevance every time you want to argue about Corum not doing anything as a freshman.
2019 - Not as many yards as Edwards in 2023 for RB2
2018 - Not as many yards as Edwards in 2023 for RB2
2017 - Evans started 2 games and was the lead back in at least 4 games. Not just an RB2.
2016 - Not as many yards as Edwards in 2023 for RB2
2015 - Not as many yards as Edwards in 2023 for RB2
In the Harbaugh era, there was a grand total of 1 season better than Edwards 2023 for true RB2. Edwards was never RB1 in 2023. Edwards however was massively helpful in a national championship year. All your YPC talk doesn't change ANY of those facts.
Morris was WR#3. He played more than twice as many snaps as Morgan. Let's just compare yardage totals for WR3
Delete2023 - Morris 197
2022 - Wilson 415
2021 - Sainristil 312
2020 - Jackson 172
2019 - DPJ 431
2018 - Perry 147
2017 - Crawford 243
2016 - Perry 183
2015 - Perry 128
So Morris's season compared to other WR3s ranks behind 5 of them. The 3 he was ahead of barely was the covid year and the other 2 were Grant Perry seasons. In other words Morris had a below average year for a WR3, and substantially lower than the last 2 years.
"Nobody's making a big deal about Morris's lack of involvement because it's basically right on par with every other year's #4 guy. "
Other than the fact the we are talking about #3, this is spot on. Nobody is making a big deal about it.
Morris played 348 snaps. Edwards played 373 snaps. Their roles are similar. They are backups. Pure backups. The starters get most of the snaps.
Edwards got the ball more to his credit but also to his role. In MIchigan's offense this is expected. But Thriving in that role, is not, necessarily expected.
Edwards produced the second most productive season for a true backup RB and people are acting like it's a disaster. Morris had a slightly below average season for a WR3. But the reactions are backwards.
The reason is 100% explainable by what happened in 3 games at the end of 2022 and the whacked expectations that came out last offseason.
"if C.J. Stokes or Tavierre Dunlap had been the primary backup in 2023 and had come in to average 3.3 yards/carry and do virtually nothing for the first 3/4 of the season, you would not have defended Stokes/Dunlap as vehemently"
DeleteThis is 100% projection. You are the one that obsesses over which backup RB should get the ball more and which should get the ball less. I don't believe in the hot hand theory like you do. I trust the coaches to establish a pecking order and go with it. I don't think this shit changes from week to week. This is where "trust the coaches" comes from - even if you try to twist it into "coaches can never be wrong" LOL.
But just for the sake of argument, If Stokes or Dunlap produced 550 yards in 3 games as a starter, with a broken hand, against elite defenses. You can bet your ass I'd be giving them a LONG leash the following year.
You were wrong about Edwards playing poorly this year. He proved that wrong against Penn State. He proved that wrong against Purdue. He proved that wrong against Iowa. He proved that in that national championship game. And that's if you completely ignore the fact that he was opening up the field for everyone else because opposing defenses were terrified of Edwards as a receiving threat.
Thunder, my man, you are compulsively obsessed with YPC, specifically small sample sizes of YPC to draw spurious conclusions about the need for changes in playing time. It's never worked out for you.
It didn't work with Mike Shaw
It didn't work with Fitz Toussaint
It didn't work with Michael Cox
It didn't work for Ty Isaac
It didn't work for Blake Corum
It didn't work for Donovan Edwards
Your YPC theology hasn't worked.
Who said "disaster?" ***
DeleteCoach Hart, his teammates, and The Don himself have talked about his struggles. The Don says it was mental, and was seeing a therapist to help. The young man said they'd be the number one RB duo in the nation, and asserts he will be Barry/WalterP ... he has astronomical standards; good for him
***wait, not that quote ... let's stick with cAsE cLoSeD
Yes JE - it is good for him. He struggled with his change in role. He NEVER struggled with playing poorly and the coaches told him to just keep doing EXACTLY what he was doing. Don't change a thing on the field and don't sweat it off the field.
DeleteEdwards' role went from averaging 24 carries in the last 3 games of 2022 as a starter to averaging 8 carries as a backup in 2023.
Maybe he bought into hype like others expecting a 1,400 yard season or people expecting to get 200 carries. I "just like to argue" but I cautioned about the dramatically over-heated hype last August an the importance of his role changing:
https://touchthebanner.blogspot.com/2023/08/2023-season-countdown-13-donovan-edwards.html
"LankAugust 26, 2023 at 11:02 AM
Edwards averaged less than 10 carries a game last year when Corum was healthy. 130 carries on the season would be an increase from his pace last year. Unless Corum gets hurt. The 140 carries that Edwards got last year, more than half of them came in the final 3 games when Corum was injured. Corum getting hurt changed the narrative. If that hadn't happened people would still be saying Edwards wasn't ready for primary back duties."
"If Corum stays healthy, I doubt Edwards breaks 150 carries or gets to 1K rushing yards.. Not that it matters. He's a great backup and I'm glad we have him. His primary value is an insurance policy on another Corum injury, being an elite receiver out of the backfield, and well, being fun and entertaining to watch."
Edwards met my expectations because my expectations were for a good backup to be a good backup. Edwards did not meet expectations for people who expected a backup to be a starter over Blake MFin Corum! Edwards SHOULD expect more of Edwards because he is Edwards LOL. None of the fans are, so they should not.
Check those August receipts JE.
My expectations for Edwards in 2024 are going to way higher than they were in 2023. Other people's are going to be lower. There's a forest. In it are some trees.
If the #13 most important team because a bad player who is playing bad, that's a disaster. It wasn't a disaster, it was the exact opposite. We won a national championship with Edwards playing a massive role. Edwards was 13th on the team in offensive snaps. They succeeded in winning a national title in part because of Edwards strong play.
Talking about his YPC against MAC teams is badly missing the plot.
@ Lank
DeleteI don't have the time or inclination to get into another long, drawn out argument about Edwards.
Tyler Morris had an average season for a #3 guy. He was #5 out of 8 seasons (not including the COVID year) in yardage. You just illustrated that yourself.
If we're going by yardage, Edwards was #6 out of 8. So...worse than Morris.
So if this is what you want to go by - yardage - then Donovan Edwards was worse than Tyler Morris.
YPC isn't all I go on. It's a proxy for what's seen on the field. We've done this before. The 2023 season didn't go the way Edwards wanted it go. I saw it. I've listened to NFL scouts talk about his lack of vision and tackle-breaking ability.
It's absolutely okay if you want to say he played well - or whatever you want to say - about Donovan Edwards in 2023. You're entitled to your opinion.
But trying to say it over and over again when there's a mountain of evidence to the contrary doesn't mean you're right.
And again...I'm okay with you not being right.
@Thunder
DeleteWe agree on Morris. Average to below-average season for top backup WR. It's a non-issue.
Edwards had the #2 in yardage among backups in the Harbaugh era. Not #5. So he had a better than average season for a backup RB. One of the best, in fact.
There isn't a mountain of evidence to say he played poorly. His YPC was unremarkable - that's it. The arguments otherwise are always relative to expectations. You talk about NFL perceptions -- Edwards is considered a sure-fire draft choice. You have hyped up a lot of guys historically that were not. You celebrated those guys. So this is a change.
If you expect Walter Payton -- Edwards is disappointing to you.
If you expect Jerry Rice -- Morris is disappointing to you.
If you expect a typical Michigan backup RB -- Edwards was excellent.
If you expect a typical Michigan backup WR -- Morris was...about that.
You are right that everyone is entitled to their opinion. But there are some indisputable facts here and Edwards' excellent production in his role is one of them.
@ Lank 4:33 p.m.
DeleteYou did a whole lot of contortions to explain who started how many games, who was RB2, who became RB1 for a couple games, who won what job, etc. It's impossible to compare RB2 to a guy who was RB2 for 9 games and then RB1 for 3 games.
You know what takes care of that issue? Yards. Per. Carry.
You keep throwing in receiving numbers to argue that he was good, but you also don't include that he had a couple embarrassingly bad drops.
And to point out another contradiction, Donovan Edwards did most of his damage in the receiving game when he lined up as a receiver. Back when A.J. Henning and Giles Jackson lined up in the backfield, you insisted they were playing running back.
So is Edwards a receiver? Should his receiving yards count as having coming from the running back position, or the receiver position?
You have a habit of making your requirements for something so narrow that it squeezes down until only your narrative can work. But then when it suits you, you change the rules and move the goalposts. This is the same thing you accuse je93 of doing.
Maybe you two don't like each other because you're just so similar.
*much of his damage in the receiving game, not most
DeleteThere's a lot there but suffice to say I don't agree with these characterizations.
Delete"contortions to explain who started how many games"
The difference between a starter and a backup has not been muddled in the last 2 years. It can be muddled sometimes but it's been crystal clear with Edwards. Edwards started 3 games in 2022 and got 20+ carries in those games as the primary guy. Blake Corum was the starter and lead back every other game. When Blake is healthy he is RB1 and Don RB2. That was true in every game in 2022 and 2023.
Past seasons have been more complicated but it's not complicated (or a contortion in any way) to say that Chris Evans (who you categorize as RB2) was acting as RB1. For example the OSU and Florida games in 2017.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/boxscore/_/gameId/400935420
Evans started. Nobody had more carries than him (11 each for him and Higdon) and he led all RBs in touches (with 5 catches added to 11 carries). He was not RB2 in any way.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/boxscore/_/gameId/400933830
Evans started and had 22 carries. He was RB1.
There's other games too. On the season Evans had fewer yards and carries than Higdon, but there were a bunch of games where he was clearly RB1 -- not RB2. That never happened with Edwards in 2023. It only happened in 2022 when Corum was injured.
The contortion is equating for comparison purposes a guy who is a clear backup playing a supporting role to a guy who is a clear starter and playing a lead/primary role.
-------------------------------
I don't agree that YPC takes care of the difference between a starter and a backup. I'm not interested in rehashing that argument again.
--------------------------------
There is no contradiction in considering receiving skills or receiving yards for a RB. It's a huge part of the job.
--------------------------------
I never once said Giles Jackson wasn't playing WR. What I said was that he A) wasn't a very good WR and B) was ALSO playing RB -- a position he lined up at, took carries, and caught passes from at Michigan and played extensively in HS. He was a hybrid player.
I have total comfort in saying a guy is a WR AND RB if he is playing both. If you want to call Edwards both, I'm good with that, as I was with Jackson. I think it's you saying you have to be one or the other. I don't think modern football works this way. Jackson was primarily a WR. Edwards was primarily a RB. Charles Woodson was primarily a CB who played WR at times. Doing both is a credit to their skills, not an indictment.
The contradiction is pretending that Edwards receiving doesn't count.
------------------------
I'm don't agree and don't understanding the accusation that I've moved the goalposts here Thunder. I've been consistent in my evaluation of Edwards as a multi-skilled backup RB -- because that's what I expected from him and that's what his role has been. I believed he was capable of doing more when asked to do more -- and he did (in 2022). I said in August he would not be a starter in 2023 and thus would not get 200 carries or 1400 yards, unless Blake got hurt. I said the expectations didn't make any sense for a backup and argued against them. I think I've been consistent going back to 2021 on my Edwards takes -- a good backup who will be capable of stepping into a bigger role when needed.
DeleteBut feel free to tell me where I'm wrong and where I've moved the goalposts or "changed the rules". For the last 3 years I've said Donovan Edwards is an impressive backup. I was told he didn't have a starter's skillset -- and then he popped in to start in 3 games and thrive. The goalposts that are getting moved here is from a guy who "falls over glass", lacks balance, and "can't run between the tackles" being expected to put up a 1,400 yard season as a backup and when he doesn't -- he's not a good RB. Until the national championship game where he is. LOL. I think I just got whiplash from the boom/bust expectations.
That's right up there with going from Joe Milton "can't start at G5 team" to "yeah but how does his draft evaluation compare to Caleb Williams or CJ Stroud".
@ Lank 2:32 p.m.
DeleteYou're moving the goalposts by insisting that all of Donovan Edwards's production came as a running back. It didn't. Giles Jackson and A.J. Henning were "running backs" when they lined up in the backfield, so Donovan Edwards should be a "receiver" when he lines up out wide.
So you can remove those catches from his "RB2" role if you really want to be specific and whittle it down.
The point is that you can't have it both ways. If you want to be right about Edwards - at least as far his position goes - you have to admit you were wrong about Jackson/Henning. And if you want to be right about Jackson/Henning, then you have to change your stance on Edwards.
Edwards had a big catch against Rutgers from the slot, a couple nice catches lined up as an outside receiver, a jet sweep from the slot position, etc. I think his completed pass against OSU came after he lined up at receiver, which was a tendency breaker because he had lined up at WR to catch the ball and/or be handed jet sweeps prior to that.
"insisting that all of Donovan Edwards's production came as a running back"
DeleteWhen did I insist that? Didn't happen.
I'm saying you can count Edwards as a hybrid player like the others if you like. There is no change in stance here Thunder. Edwards plays some WR. Jackson played some RB. There is no issue or inconsistency in recognizing that some guys played multiple positions.
There is zero moving of the goalposts. LOL
I think you're conflating your stance "Jackson is a WR not a RB" with my stance that he was both. I showed you the play where Jackson lined up in the backfield, subbed in and out with Charbonnet to make my point. I never said he didn't play WR. Not once. I wanted to see more of him at RB and thought he could fill that void on the roster in 2019.
None of this has anything to do with Edwards production or quality of play. You want receiving yards to not count. But they do. They count. They count if he lines up in the backfield and they count if he lines up in the slot. Just like Giles Jackson yards count if he's catching passes out of the backfield or getting rushing yards from the slot.
If you want to evaluate Edwards as WR -- go right on ahead. Nobody is stopping you. If you want to discount a RB playing as a WR (a massively valuable skill versatility) -- well, I guess you can do that too. But Edwards has started 3 games as Michigan's RB, he was Michigan's top backup RB for the last 2 years. He's a RB who can flex outside which makes him just like Colston Loveland - a TE who can flex outside. Jackson was a WR who could play RB (and did so in high school and college). Henning same.
I don't see why this bother's you. I don't see why it's an inconsistency in your brain. It's a very odd contortion to get worked up about in relation to the completely uncontroversial and factual take that Donovan Edwards was RB2 in 2023. But if you need me to agree that he sometimes lines up at WR -- I wholeheartedly do.
It changes nothing -- just another feather in Edwards cap. Same as I said in 2021.
Evans and Corum also lined up at WR at times.
Delete"When did I insist that? Didn't happen."
DeleteEvery time je93 and/or I bring up Edwards's production at running back, you insist on tossing in all of his pass receiving stats - even when he was lined up at receiver. So yes, you insist Edwards's production coming at running back.
Jackson wasn't a WR who could play RB any more than Trente Jones was an OT who could play TE or Hassan Haskins was a RB who could play QB or Donovan Edwards was a RB who could play QB. Just because someone lines up in a different spot doesn't mean we need to consider him as a different position. Sean McKeon lined up as a RB one time. Does that mean he's a TE who could play RB? If Junior Colson went out to cover a RB who lines up at WR, is Colson a LB who can play CB?
I could probably find a play or two where Trente Jones subs in for a WR. Does that mean Jones is a WR?
I could go back to the Hassan Haskins days of taking snaps. So when Cade McNamara subbed back in the game and Carter Selzer subbed out, does that mean McNamara is a QB who can play TE?
To be clear, I appreciate versatility. I like when Haskins can take Wildcat QB snaps, when Edwards can line up outside, etc. But I can also recognize they're not changing positions, just like I know an overshifted third baseman isn't suddenly "also playing shortstop" or a point guard posting up against a shorter defender in the post isn't suddenly "also playing power forward."
DeleteSo there are two options:
1. Edwards is a RB, Giles Jackson was a WR, A.J. Henning was a WR
OR
2. Edwards is a RB in the backfield and a WR lined up wide; Jackson was a WR lined up outside and a RB in the backfield; Henning was a WR lined up outside and a RB in the backfield
The third option is that Edwards is a RB/WR, Jackson was a WR/RB, and Henning was a WR/RB.
DeleteAll of it is semantics and beside the point.
If it's important to you to pick one of your 2 options I pick the second. People can play multiple positions, sometimes in the same game. Chris Evans, Khalid Hill, Max Bredeson, Colston Loveland, Charles Woodson, Trente Jones are all other examples. It's pretty common.
Well, of course it's semantics NOW because it doesn't fit your narrative. You're no longer trying to argue that Giles Jackson is the third running back or can take on some of the load at running back or whatever nonsense you were talking about a few years ago.
DeleteBut okay. You picked #2. So when you talk about Donovan Edwards as a running back from now on, make sure to remove his rushing/receiving yardage from when he lined up at receiver.
Your "third option" isn't an option because nobody's going to buy that Cade McNamara was a QB/TE, Junior Colson was a LB/CB, Blake Corum was a RB/WR, Sean McKeon was a TE/RB, etc. Was Chad Pennington a QB/WR when he lined up at receiver with Ronnie Brown taking Wildcat snaps? Or was he just a QB lined up in a new location?
My Giles Jackson take from a few years ago is in no way conflicting with my current Don Edwards takes. It's your unrelated quibble. You'll have to explain the connection to the "narrative".
DeleteWhy do I need to remove Donovan Edwards receiving yards from the WR spot?
Are you going to discount all the receiving yards from Colston Loveland's stats when he didn't line up in-line next to the tackle like a traditional TE?
Of course not.
Thunder this fits a pattern of you want people to be put in a box and live in a black and white world -- QBs must pass and only passing stats count. RBs must run and only running stats count. WRs catch passes and only receiving stats count. The dream of the 80s is alive!
DeleteIf a guy doesn't fit the model (Denard, Don Edwards, Chris Evans, Giles Jackson) you act like it's a gimmick. It's not! WRs run the ball -- every game! RBs catch the ball -- every game! RBs line up to the right of the QB, to the left of the QB, straight behind the QB, and....gasp, shock, horror....outside the tackle box at WR positions.
https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-2022-nfl-seasons-most-productive-running-backs-from-the-slot-christian-mccaffrey-rhamondre-stevenson
It's a regular part of the RBs job.
But let's pretend it isn't for a minute. Hybrid players exist. You just listed one in your other post: TE/FB Max Bredeson. You're talking about a 220 pound freshman TE contributing as a pass catcher (a.k.a. WR). DE/DT is another. Nickel/Safety is another. I could go on and on but you get the point and you agree with it. It's not unusual.
But now let's set THAT aside and focus only on guys who play WR and RB. RB/WRs if you will. A few examples at the NFL level: Ty Montgomery was listed at various places as a WR, a RB, and a WR/RB -- because he played both. Deebo Samuel calls himself a Wideback and lines up at both. Urban Meyer's offenses had a Hybrid Back position they called H-back, that Curtis Samuel played. He has 121 carries in the NFL while being generally listed as a WR. This is not an exhaustive list. These are not gimmick players.
Edwards plays RB and started games when he had a broken hand and could barely catch. He usually lines up at RB. Sometimes he lines up at WR. There is zero world where this a problem or ever was. There is zero world where this skill should be discounted in any way. It's part of why Edwards MIGHT be the highest drafted Michigan RB in a long time.
All of this is fine if you didn't spend time insisting that Giles Jackson, A.J. Henning, etc. could carry some of the load at running back, based on their fewer than 1 carry per game. And yes, you did that. Semaj Morgan and Roman Wilson have also received carries, and yet neither one is threatening to carry any of the load at running back.
DeleteNo matter which way you go with this, you're admitting you were wrong at one point or another. And the main point of THAT is hoping that we don't spend time in the future making silly arguments about the next tiny slot receiver and whether he's a running back or a receiver. If Semaj Morgan lines up at running back for two plays in 2024, I don't want to spend the 2025 pre-season fending off arguments of "Well, I expect Ben Hall and Cole Cabana to be the top two backs, but Semaj Morgan can also take some of the load."
Yes I did do that and yes I still think that. I believe hybrid WR/RB can be a part of the RB rotation. Because I saw it happen at Michigan and I see it happen in the NFL.
DeleteIt has nothing to with Donovan Edwards.
I'm not sure where I am admitting I am wrong. Giles Jackson didn't play RB at all for Washington and barely played it at Michigan. So two coaching staffs don't see him as a good option at RB. Guess what though - he's also p
he's also not playing much WR and when he is he's threat as a runner is still primary (9 rushes vs 14 catches last year).
DeleteI speculated Jackson could have a bigger role in the backfield and he never has. (Note: he also transferred). I did not predict it would happen. - I was saying it was a viable option. You disagree and that's fine.
I gave you the NFL examples of players who you might classify as WR lining up at RB. Your assertion that it can't happen and is "wrong" is disproven by this. Deebo Samuel proves you wrong.
I'll admit when I'm wrong. You bringing up an argument about my speculation from 4 years ago that hasn't changed doesn't make me wrong.
And again - nothing whatsoever to do with Donovan Edwards discussion above.
This is a fact: Giles Jackson played RB and WR at Michigan. He lined up at RB and took the ball and ran with it like a RB. He lined up at RB and caught passes like a RB. He also lined up at WR and caught passess and ran like a WR. He was a WR/RB. Sorry that's against the rules you made up, but he played both positions just like Jay Reimersma or Devin Funchess or Jaden McBurrows or Karsen Barnhart.
DeleteJackson was mostly a WR. Played some RB. Mostly WR. You don't think he could expand on the RB and I disagree with you. disagreed then, disagree now.
You also denied he played RB but he did and I've proven it a few times on here. Watch the Alabama/Michigan tape. It happened. He was RB3 that day behind HH and ZC. He was our leading WR also.
Mgoblog even commented on it:
Gattis got a few chunks from catching Bama overreacting to the Armyness. The flea-flicker to DPJ was one. The wheel to Giles Jackson was a "back the hell off" moment against the WLB that used Giles Jackson at running back. That's a bit of a gimmick unless Jackson can do all of the other RB things. Michigan didn't have a Blake Corum or Chris Evans in 2019 to be that A-level receiving threat out of the backfield."
The thing I'm supposed to be wrong about I demonstrated happen. My speculation that he could grow into that role did not. Chris Evans - a future NFL RB - returned to the team. He kind of fit that need pretty well (pass threat RB) and Jackson (not being very good at WR) lost out on the role and transferred after the season. Even with playing time at WR opening up...
Opinions on Giles Jackson being an effective WR/RB, WR, or RB have no affected on opinions of Donovan Edwards being an effective RB/WR, WR, or RB.
DeleteLank, you said Giles Jackson was one of Michigan's top three running backs by the end of the 2019 season. This wasn't just projection. It was in retrospect.
DeleteGiles Jackson had 19 total touches that entire season, while Tru Wilson (46) and Christian Turner (48) both touched the ball more than him.
These are just SOME of the comments about Jackson playing RB:
Delete"We’ve seen a lot of slot WR types contribute as freshman and not really get much better (Norfleet, McDoom). But Jackson played a lot of RB and Kick Returner and seemed to take touches from some pretty good skill position options in 2019. He is the type of player Gattis seems to love. To me, he’s the highest upside option at RB on the roster. I often say RBs don’t matter because very few differentiate themselves, but Jackson is the special kind of athlete that could be an exception to the rule."
"Regarding depth -Michigan is loaded with proven options (unlike last year where everything was unclear and a walk-on was prominently involved.)
Charbonnet
Evans
Haskins
late-season sensation Giles Jackson
Corum – a freshman drawing a great deal of hype.
A short-yardage specialist with 8 career TDs on top of all that."
You called him the "highest upside option" on the roster and a "proven option" when he lined up like 4 times in the backfield. That was an even crazier notion than if I said Hassan Haskins was the highest upside option at QB and a proven option at QB for lining up in the Wildcat, and he did that a bunch more than Giles Jackson lined up in the backfield.
2019
DeleteGiles Jackson WAS the #3 RB at the end of the season, against Alabama. This is fact. Your gotcha doesn't hit. He had more snaps and touches than Wilson (who played) and Turner (who didn't AFAIK) in the last game of the season.
Harbaugh and his staff, with a month to prepare for a bowl game, and Haskins, Charbonnet, Turner, and Wilson all available chose from, elected to put Giles Jackson in the backfield and hand him the ball and throw him the ball more than anyone besides the 2 guys who went on to play in the NFL.
2020
My speculation was my speculation. I stand by it. He never got a chance with Evans back.
Just kidding, I don't stand by it. Jackson never showed any real upside after that Alabama game. He wasn't as good as I hoped he could be. The 2020 RB room was the best RB room in Michigan history and Jackson never played RB again. In your quote I was speaking to how loaded the RB room was in the context of how you were overrating ZC. Which was 100% valid then and played out -- ZC's role diminished as the season went on and he transferred after not wanting to sit behind Corum and Haskins.
But back to Jackson. Yes - he was not the best RB in the room and it wasn't even close. Congrats for calling me out on my speculation about a guys upside. There were better RBs on the roster <--- I never said otherwise but I liked Jackson's upside as a playmaker.
At least you found a quote to (sort of) back up up what you are saying. Credit for that.
I guess if we're going back to years old takes unrelated to Donovan Edwards.... You liked Michael Onwenu's upside as a DT and advocated he moved there. Where you WRONG to say that? Or was it possible if that move happened he might have succeeded there due to his upside?
Lies. MGoBlue lists Jackson as a WR, and only a WR. Lining up in the backfield and even getting a few carries doesn't change that. Not at MICHIGAN, not at Washington
Deletehttps://mgoblue.com/sports/football/roster/giles-jackson/21334
@ Lank 5:27 p.m.
DeleteThe difference between my Michael Onwenu take and your Giles Jackson take:
1. I never said, "Well, he's a proven option at defensive tackle and he's the highest upside defensive tackle on the roster." I didn't live in a world where he was a defensive tackle at all, because he wasn't. I also didn't live in a world where Trente Jones was a TE, where Hassan Haskins was a QB, etc. Every commentator who talked about Jones mentioned him as "the sixth offensive lineman" or an "extra tackle." No analysts ever talked about him like he was a true tight end, a proven tight end, the highest upside tight end on the roster, etc.
2. Onwenu actually turned out to be good somewhere, just not at DT. He can only play one position at a time. Giles Jackson is going into year 6 and has yet to do much, other than an occasional catch. He has yet to score more than 1 offensive touchdown in any season, and his last special teams touchdown was in 2019 at Michigan. He's basically just a guy, whereas by year 6 of college...Onwenu had already been starting in the NFL for a year.
But it all *is* related to Donovan Edwards. Because as I mentioned above, you used to talk about Giles Jackson like he was a running back - which he never was.
Let's switch roles and see if I'm doing this right...
Donovan Edwards is the most proven option at wide receiver. I often say receivers don't matter because the running game is so important for Michigan's offensive approach, but Edwards has the potential to change my mind.
Also, just so we're clear...
DeleteMy bad running back takes include a guy who got drafted to the NFL in the 6th round and played a couple years of NFL ball (Michael Cox) and a guy who averaged 6.1 yards per carry and rushed for 1,170 yards and 8 touchdowns at Michigan (Ty Isaac).
Your bad running back takes include a guy who doesn't play running back and really isn't very noteworthy as a receiver or returner, either.
1. Yes - that's one difference Onwenu never played DT. Instead he was a very successful OG. Your implied assertion was that he had upside at the position, although it was wholly unproven and pure speculation. Defensible speculation but speculation that was "wrong" insofar as speculation about upside can be "wrong".
DeleteJackson did play RB - where he looked good and was effective in very limited snaps. At WR he wasn't looking like anything special and indeed has been a career backup. I said he had upside. I based that on what he showed on the field.
2. The case for Jackson at RB is better than the case for Onwenu at DT because....Onwenu was an impact player at his current position. Your logic is backwards! JAG is exactly what Jackson is at WR. Onwenu is one of the best OG to come through Michigan in the last couple decades. You suggested he move. Which hypothetical move was more "wrong"?
3. Gile Jackson played RB. You are wrong about a very basic fact.
4. The connection here makes no sense Thunder. "Donovan Edwards is the most proven option at wide receiver. I often say receivers don't matter because the running game is so important for Michigan's offensive approach, but Edwards has the potential to change my mind."
Your hypothetical argument (that no one is making) is the connection between my GIles Jackson take from 3 years ago to now? So it doesn't exist?
I don't live in a world where HH is a QB either.
Thunder - all due respect but your bad RB take list is exceedingly long. I can get into that if you want. I don't think you want me to go there. It goes way beyond Isaac and Cox. Isaac was a solid college player and a useful backup. You've got many that are much worse than that one, even though you were so vehemently and consistently wrong - at least he was a decent player. Cox did nothing in college and nothing in the NFL but you'll always have the penultimate pick of the 7th round of the 2013 draft to hang your hat on to weigh against the buckets of bad RB takes, I guess.
DeleteMy bad RB take is speculating a hybrid WR/RB might have a lot of upside at RB. I can live with that one! Particularly if I'm being called out for it by a guy who called one of the highest paid OLmen in the NFL was better served moving to a different position even after he proved to be an excellent OL.
Giving his passing acument you might make a better analogy of Edwards as a QB rather than Haskins. Of course nobody is arguing for this so the connection to the Giles Jackson scenario is laughable regardless.
DeleteI'll let the facts speak for themselves about Onwenu:
DeleteFreshman (2016)
Made collegiate debut vs. Hawaii (Sept. 3), playing both offensive and defensive line
Saw action at defensive tackle against Penn State (Sept. 24)
Played both ways at Rutgers (Oct. 8) logging snaps at right guard and nose tackle as well as on field goal protection unit
https://mgoblue.com/sports/football/roster/michael-onwenu/19056
Some more facts:
Deletehttps://www.patspulpit.com/2024/3/14/24100710/patriots-michael-onwenu-nfl-free-agency-contract-details-analysis
If I was wrong about seeing upside with Jackson at RB you were wrong for seeing upside with Onwenu at DT. For the record -- I don't think either opinion is wrong as it's speculation based on a hypothetical counter-factual. But if one of them is wrong - it's the one pulling an elite pro player and multi-year starter at Michigan from a position he thrived at. The speculation is trumped by the success.
Maybe Lebron James would make a great TE but it's kind of beside the point.
As a side note Thunder -- I would encourage you to start thinking about players success based on their career earnings rather than their draft status. It seems like you might still viewing a 6th round pick like Onwenu as on par with guys like Jake Rudock, Michael Cox, etc.
DeleteThat's wrong. Those guys have been out-earned by Camaron Cheesman. Rudock played a premium position like QB but is likely to be out-earned by Christopher Hinton by the end of the coming season.
Hanging on to draft status once these guys have legit careers is like holding on to star rankings after Derrick Green when he's ceding carries to Drake Johnson and Sione Houma or Shane Morris when he was backing up Wilton Speight and John O'Korn.
@ Lank 7:27 p.m.
DeleteI don't even know what you're talking about with Onwenu at this point, and frankly, you don't, either. Earlier in this conversation, you said he never played DT. He did play DT.
I'm not going to comment any more on this conversation. I've said what I have to say.
Oh hey, look: MGoBlue lists onwenu as playing both ways ... but not Jackson
DeleteAlmost like the athletic department and football people know what they're talking about, while self proclaimed "d•mmies" do not
Yes - I forgot he did that. It doesn't change the larger point that moving him from OL to DT was a bad idea because he has been extremely successful as OL.
DeletePosition changes, or speculation on them, have nothing to do with Don Edwards, who nobody is speculating about a position change for.
DeleteDon Edwards is a good RB. He was a good RB in High School, he is a good RB in college, and he's projected to be a good RB in the NFL.
You're trying to make goofy arguments about this guy going from great to bad in one off season. You're trying to discount him as a RB because he's a very good WR. I think you're missing the point.
It's the same point you missed with Denard Robinson -- maybe there is a better guy to drop back and deliver a pass than Denard and maybe there is a better guy to carry the ball in an eye form on 3rd and short than Don, but since it's not 1988 anymore we can acknowledge that Denard and Don can do fine with THAT thing while being GREAT at other things the position entails. Maybe it was a time where THAT thing was 90% of the job but that time is past.
Moving the target, yet another misleading strategy of LyinLank
ReplyDeleteI don't care that you had low expectations for Edwards, no one does. I'm talking about his own expectations, v the results, and what HE said
You mean that YOU want to talk about Edwards expectations for himself. Nobody else was. Just you. Moving the target, and then accusing somebody else of doing it is classic JEverytime.
DeleteEdwards had nearly 800 yards as the top backup RB on a national title winning team. But you go ahead and talk about feelings if you want. Thunder can talk about YPC till he's blue in the face. Won't change the facts.
Edwards has done a great job whether he is RB1 stepping in for injured Corum, RB2 backing up Corum/Haskins, or RB3. And that's why he's expected to be RB1 next year and then onto being a high NFL choice.
He would have liked to have been RB1 last year too, but Blake Corum was in his way. It's not complicated.
Uh, YES ... The Don's own words about his own performance matter
DeleteYour low expectations however, are not relevant
You lost. Again
Every accusation is a confession. The funny part is you don't ever know it.
DeleteSure ... I'm the one with low expectations ... "aUgUsT rEcEiPtS" ... oops, not that ... I meant case closed!
DeleteTalking to yourself again. I get it, it's your only chance of winning an argument.
DeleteLank - trying to simplify this a bit as it feels like we’ve lost the first through the trees a bit in the Edwards argument. What grade would you give him for his performance in 2023?
DeleteIn the past, Lank has said GREAT, VERY GOOD and GOOD ... but he's also applied caveats like "for a backup." Translated to traditional K-12 grading, that's an A or B... for a backup
Delete*standby for an essay with more misleading information and straight up lies
A-. He had one of the best seasons for a backup in our life times. Started the year looking sluggish at times as a ball carrier though, so maybe a B+ if factoring in preseason expectations of more frequent big plays.
DeleteVery excited to see him step into the starting spot in 2024.
I guess I don't understand that grade. He averaged 4.2 YPC on a pretty decent sample size. I understand all of the caveats around YPC but you can't argue that doesn't matter.
DeleteI'll give him a C+ for the year overall. C- purely for his rushing success and the grade improves for his pass catching, ability to split out wide as well as his pass protection (not going to pretend like I pay attention to his pass protection but assuming it was solid based on our pass protection overall).
Lol "sluggish at times" ... at that time, you insisted pointing that out was wrong ... which is it? Not even YOU agree with you
Delete@Anon. Part 1
DeleteI don't think YPC is all that important at the individual level. It's a team stat produced by 11 guys that we ascribe to 1. It's highly variable from play to play, even with the same guy. It's highly variable from game to game over a season. Its highly variable depending on context (expected yards). And it's based on something that RBs do only half the time even when they are in the game.
Let me ask you a question Anon.
Do you think it's possible that Donovan Edwards went from being one of the best RBs in the country to one of the worst RBs in the Big Ten in one offseason?
To me that is just wildly unbelievable. Not impossible but like why would that happen? Yet a difference of YPC from 7.1 YPC to 3.whatever he had before the post season would tell you that's the case.
And then poof - someone waved a magic wand and the 3.whatever ypc guy became the 10 ypc guy in the postseason. Suddenly he woke up and became great again? C'mon!
Do you also believe Donovan Edwards was better than Blake Corum in 2022? YPC says yes.
Do you also believe that Kallell Mullings so dramatically improved in the same offseason from a player who would run the ball for 2 YPC to a player who would run it for over 6 YPC? With the same coaching staff overseeing both their offseason development and training programs? YPC says yes.
Do you also believe that Fitzgerald Toussaint got worse each of his 4 years at Michigan and then got drafted anyway? YPC says yes.
I'm not saying YPC is ALWAYS irrelevant but when it fails to pass some basic sniff tests I think you gotta reconsider basing so many opinions of performance based on it.
Even if I agreed with a C grade as a rusher (I don't - he had two enormous runs in the national championship and that is enough for a huge year for a backup RB - imagine if Cole Cabana or Ben Hall were the ones who did that we'd be besides ourselves with excitement) the fact that we all (I think) agree that he is an A+ as a pass catching threat would put the grade to B unless you think he absolutely sucks as a blocker.
"YPC is highly variable from play to play" ???wtf???
DeleteWho said Edwards was one of the best in the country? Who said he was one of the worst in the B1G?
When the points are based on hyperbole & exaggeration, we get LIES
@Anon Part 2
DeleteI think snap count is a lot more indicative of play and value than YPC. Corum - 469. Edwards - 373. Mullings - 87.
We had a top 5 offense in 2023 and Don Edwards was a huge part of that. The coaches decisions speak to their assessment and they're closer to the team than anyone.
So let's think of this in an another "sniff test" context.
What grade you would give Mullings on his season?
He averaged over 6YPC which is an excellent number so maybe you want to give him an A or at least a B+, I'm guessing?
I'm projecting here but perhaps your Mullings grade is better than your Edwards grade.
So then what -- you think these coaches made the wrong decision right? A B player is better than a C player, at least in the moment right? The NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP WINNING coaches that had a top 5 offense played the lesser player 4x more than the better player?
How do you reconcile that with all they accomplished -- while flubbing playing time at the RB position? It's nonsensical. (Unless you think RBs don't matter LOL)
Michigan didn't win a natty and have a top 5 offense while giving that many snaps C+ player, while letting a better player (mostly) languish on the bench, while limiting the usage of the best RB in Michigan history who we KNOW can play more than 30 some snaps.
We won a national championship with this guy! Playing this much! Even when he was producing the most unexceptional days in rushing production (4 carries for 11 yards against Alabama, 10 for 31 against OSU) he was out there for 18 snaps compared to Blakes 37 in the Rose Bowl and 25 to Blake's 35 against OSU. Kaleel Mullings was there too! Playing a single digit number of snaps in each game.
Now somebody like Thunder might see that as an error on the staff's part and give you a "let's see more if this guy" type of take. But is that reasonable? Are we really going to look at a box score of individual stats and see a team game and say "yeah but if they gave Mullings snaps to Edwards we could have won by X more"? I mean -- It's not impossible! Hypothetically, it could be true. But you have to think THESE coaches are making the wrong decision and then think NFL scouts (when they repeat the decision of taking Edwards over Mullings in the Draft) are also making the same wrong decision. That YPC tells you better than the pros and experts.
I don't think so. I think Harbaugh and company nailed it. I think the box score isn't telling you the story.
I'm a believer in stats, data analysis, etc and I apply these things in my work. Like every other professional working in those areas we KNOW the numbers don't tell us everything, but we hope they are useful in telling us something.
In the case of YPC the things they are telling you are often, very clearly and obviously, exactly incorrect.
@Anon Part 3
DeleteI think what's happening here is obvious -- we're grading on a curve of expectations and the expectations for Edwards were to produce like he did in 2022. But Corum was healthy all year so Edwards was a backup all year (plus didn't break his hand) so there was no good reason to expect a repeat in 2023 and indeed we didn't see it.
And even if he did start 3 games again in 2023 -- 7.1 YPC was not a sustainable number, even if he became a much better player in 2023 he wasn't going to match that because YPC is highly variable and 7+ ypc isn't sustainable for anyone.
Edwards is an excellent player who had an excellent year -- set expectations aside, he was an ELITE backup RB nationally with an ELITE skillset as a pass catcher and speed-in-space runner.
Again, if Cole Cabana or Ben Hall was doing this stuff we'd be going crazy.
Edwards didn't play great to start the year I'll acknowledge, he didn't get out in the open field very often (and not all of that is contextual), and he didn't break a lot of long runs as a result. Maybe he was pressing early in the year IDK. But he was the same player he was in 2022...except better. I KNOW he was in that weight room and working hard in the offseason for a fact. YPC and overheated expectations be damned, he got better, and so did the team.
Essay complete!
DeleteI see my biggest fan couldn't wait to pipe in mid-essay. Hi JEverytime!
Delete"at that time, you insisted pointing that out was wrong"
DeleteOne quote! You can't do it.
Simple: Edwards has proven to be better than Mullings. With our OL, Edwards was always more likely to break out. It took 15 games, but he finally did. In the 3mos that preceded the national championship, we had Coach Hart talk about Edwards trusting his vision & blocking, Coach Harbaugh talk about 'olives stuck in a jar,' and Edwards himself point to mental challenges ... trust the coaches & listen to the player. He is the more proven player, and was bound to break one, even if that meant first running into the butts of his OL and nearly missing the HOLE on the left leading to the endzone
DeleteThen - while trusting the coaches - examine the scenarios Mullings was trusted. Short yardage, bruising runs. Why? Do the coaches recognize that The Don needs a huge hole, and hasn't demonstrated an ability to grind out extra yards? Trust the coaches & their decisions right? Why would they leave "one of the best in the nation" on the sidelines during those scenarios, and trust the former LB? Trust the coaches!
Here we go again: "jUsT oNe qUoTe"
DeleteLmao, I did ONE search:
LankOctober 13, 2023 at 3:47 PM
"Hoping to see a big day from Donovan just to quiet the narratives about his struggles"
https://touchthebanner.blogspot.com/2023/10/preview-michigan-vs-indiana.html?m=1
but - as always - my favorite quote is "cAse cLoSeD"
Dodging & excusing ... your appeal is DENIED
DeleteCase Closed LyinLank
Using snap count in order to evaluate the effectiveness of a player makes zero sense to me. If that's the key metric that you're using, you're inherently assuming that every play is a success. You're also equating team success with player success, which is completely flawed logic.
DeleteI don't think Edwards was a worse player from 2022 > 2023. I do think he played worse in 2023 relative to 2022. The idea that a RB can't make worse decisions from year to year or game to game is insane to me.
I suppose I should have clarified what I was looking for with respect to a player grade. I was really asking for a grade for the snaps that player received. So with that in mind, yes Mullings would receive a higher grade than Edwards.
If we change the question to "grade this player based on the degree to which they contributed to the team's success" I'll go with a B+ for Edwards. Very strong contributor in multiple areas and stepped up in a couple of big games, but still was not terribly effective overall as a ball carrier. I think the decisions he made in 2023 carrying the ball were not fantastic, combined with his skillset not allowing him to maximize yards from the blocking he received.
Grading based on snaps received is grading on a curve. Are you grading Mullings above Corum as well?
DeleteNo - using snap counts does not assume every play is success. It also doesn't assume every play is a failure. It makes no such assumption. It's unrelated except in sofar that the coaching staff is going to look at failure/success to make a decision about future playing time (snap counts). So, it's an indicator of how successful players are on a down-to-down basis (while also considering ability demonstrated in practice) but it makes no assumptions directly.
"Equating team success with player success, which is completely flawed logic." No - not equating. I don't think Leon Franklin is a great player just because he was on a national championship team. But team success is a function of player success for the 11 out there. Right? They're related not equated. Good teams tend to play good players? I'll not resort to strawmen and assume you agree.
"a RB can't make worse decisions from year to year or game to game "
Nobody said a player can't make worse decisions from game to game but you're saying he made worse decisions for the entire year? At that point aren't you a worse player? Steph Curry might go 1-10 on 3s one (off) night but if his season 3 percentage drops from 42% to 32% between seasons, something happened and he got worse. Maybe he can bounce back but something happened that offseason or subsequent to it that made him a worse player for a substantial period of time.
Your approach in assessing everyone on a per snap basiss Anon presumes that coaches decisions are arbitrary and random. Mullings got a quarter of the snaps as Edwards for no real reason, that's just how fate had it. Likewise for Corum over Edwards. The coaches pick names out of a hat and that's who plays so it's all about per snap production. That's not how it works.
I'd argue that based on performance Corum has to be over Edwards and Edwards has to be over Mullings. Or else the coaches are wrong. The snap counts tell us what the coaches think -- Mullings role growing over the season into the trusted short yardage guy and rotational contributor speaks to his growth. He went from Greg Crippen/Darius Clemons level (mostly garbage time snaps) to Max Bredeson/Trente Jones level (key rotational piece/top backup). Snap counts tell us this. YPC does not.
None of this makes sense to me Anon. RBs don't get 5 times better vision from game to game. You know how I know -- because the guys getting 20+ carries a game will see far more consistent YPC than the guys getting 5 or 6 YPC. Don Edwards didn't get half as good at decision-making, vision, and balance in one off season. Kaleel Mullings dind't get 3 times as good at those things in one off season. YPC says they did.
Edwards averaged 4.2 YPC while Corum averaged 4.8 YPC. One guy is "not terribly effective overall as a ball carrier" and the other is the best RB in Michigan history and projected to be drafted in the upper/mid rounds. Does that make sense?
Those numbers (4.8 and 4.2) are probably somewhat telling about who the better runner is, because they align with the snap counts. The year before Edwards averaged 7.1 YPC while Corum averaged 5.9 YPC. Those numbers are not telling about who the better runner is, because they don't align with the snap counts. So, if you're like me (and PFF) and you think Corum was a better player than Edwards in both years - you'll consider snap counts to be more indicative than YPC. No harm in using both metrics, but one is more telling than the other.
Can't read this without thinking of:
Deletehttps://youtu.be/qwORrW_AzOk?si=xZzrFUwAu0-t1kZF
@Lank You have a tendency to argue 100% in a particular direction while ignoring context. Good example below:
DeleteEdwards averaged 4.2 YPC while Corum averaged 4.8 YPC. One guy is "not terribly effective overall as a ball carrier" and the other is the best RB in Michigan history and projected to be drafted in the upper/mid rounds. Does that make sense?
If you watch Michigan at all, you recognize that Corum receives almost every short yardage snap. The difference in YPC relative to Edwards is clearly not as large as it would be otherwise - common sense tells you that. On the other hand - comparing Corum's YPC in 2023 relative to 2022 actually tells you something and is supported by the eye test - he wasn't quite as explosive early on in 2023 as he was in 2022. The good old eye test isn't always incorrect.
Also to your point on the coaches potentially being wrong - of course they can be wrong sometimes. I think even they would admit that. And to be clear, I'm not arguing that playing Edwards over Mulling was "wrong" - Edwards is a super explosive player capable of ripping off long runs and also presents you with a pass catching threat. That being said, Edwards ran for 31 yards on 10 carries against OSU. Do I think Mullings gets more than 31 yards on those 10 carries? Yeah, most likely. Both statements can be true. I didn't think Edwards was a great ball carrier this year. I also don't begrudge the coaches for playing him, because he gives you value outside of just carrying the ball, and there was always the possibility that his decision making would improve at some point.
Edwards had three 20+ yard runs all season: 1 against PSU and 2 against Washington.
DeleteMullings had two 20+ yard runs this season: 1 against Nebraska and 1 against Minnesota.
Mullings only had 36 carries this season, while Edwards had 119.
I guess I just don't understand why we have to pretend like Edwards ran the ball well this year. I don't need 1,000 words and a bunch of unrelated arguments in response because at some point you either believe
Delete1) Edwards was at least somewhat responsible for averaging 4.2 YPC. Another RB on the roster could have gained more yards from those carries.
2) His YPC was completely out of his hands. There was no possibility for improvement
I'm firmly in camp #1.
I like having the "YPC requires context" argument circled back at Me. I agree with you Anon. There's more to it than YPC - and Corum illustrates it. So does Edwards. So do the other examples I sited.
DeleteThat's why YPC is a problem - it's definitive when it lines up with your opinion and context-dependant when it doesn't. Great that we all agree on that. Maybe we shouldn't reference it at all?
I'm not pretending that Edwards ran the ball well this year -- he did. Every time? Nope, like every RB. He also caught it well, ran routes well, and blocked well and scared opposing DCs well. He was one of the top players on the a top 5 offense. He was (and is) a better RB than Mullings.
Don't believe me? Ask Jim Harbaugh, Sherrone Moore, Mike Hart and company. They don't control YPC but they do control snaps.
Edwards was definitely somewhat responsible for averaging 4.2 YPC. Another RB on the roster could have gained fewer yards from those carries or more. It's hypothetical and contextual. I'm in whatever camp that says YPC doesn't fully tell the story.
I'm not arguing that it "fully tells the story". I'm arguing that it tells some of the story.
Delete"I'm not pretending that Edwards ran the ball well this year -- he did. Every time? Nope, like every RB."
I have no idea what this means. Of course no RB runs the ball well every time. That's why we look at averages, preferably over a decent sample size. And those averages are helpful in conjunction with proper context.
I'm not interested in asking the coaches about the effectiveness of players when I can see the results with my own eyes and look at the data. Coaches aren't infallible when it comes to allocating playing time. Biases and conservative / aggressive strategy factors into it. If your argument is that coaches are correct 100% of the time and we therefore shouldn't question decisions as fans, I'm not sure what the purpose is of any of this discussion.
@ Lank 2:40 p.m.
DeleteYards per carry is always context-dependent, but over a long enough timeline, it should roughly equate. A short yardage back (Khalid Hill) is never going to get the opportunities to compare to a standard back (Blake Corum), and nobody argues that.
Donovan Edwards had 119 carries this season. That's not a small sample size. He wasn't a short yardage back. We even saw him get yanked on the goal line for Blake Corum when Edwards tried to wave Corum off the field and Hart pulled him out, anyway.
Everything is context-dependent. Completing 60% of your passes used to be amazing back in the 1980s and 1990s, and now that's the baseline. Anything below 60% starts to make you wonder whether the right guy is out on the field. Denard Robinson was a bad passer when he was completing 55% of his throws in 2012, but you've pumped him up for having a great season when he completed 63% in 2010. There's always some sort of context.
When given 119+ carries, the YPC opportunities should even out somewhat. Nobody gets that many short yardage carries, and nobody gets that many carries against light boxes strictly on passing downs.
Take away the names and faces. Just drafting by stats, would you want to draft a guy who averages 3.5 yards/carry or a guy who averages 5.5 yards/carry? Do you want a guy who completes 65% of his passes or 55%? Do you want a shooter who makes 40% of his threes or 32% of his threes?
For the most part, better is better and worse is worse. Add in the eye test that Anon has discussed, and it's really not as difficult as you're making it seem.
I mostly agree with your argument about long-haul but that's assuming similar roles. A short-yardage back can get 10000 carries in short yardage packages and will never match the YPC of very much not a RB me getting 10000 carries as a 3rd down specialist. Likewise, a RB getting 10000 carries against the OSU/PSU/Oregon defenses is going to average compared to a lesser RB getting 10000 carries against Indiana/Minnesota/Purdue. We could be comparing Blake Corum and Tavierre Dunlap and Dunlap is going to come out on top if circumstances are that favorable. Like you said -- there's always context.
DeleteThe variance isn't just contextual it's play to play execution of 11 guys. That's why you can call the same play 2 times in a row and one of them can be 25 yards and the next can be -1 yards and it really makes no difference if that RB is "playing well" or not when he's getting crushed in the backfield by a DT.
119 carries is a small sample size when you consider this variance. So is 140 carries the year before. Playing well or not playing well you can assume that Edwards wouldn't repeat 7 YPC after 2022. Likewise, you can assume he won't repeat 4 YPC after 2023. He's very likely to be somewhere in between, close to his career mark of 5.
I talked about that midseason with Edwards and that's exactly how it played out in the end. You say it should even out at some point -- and it did. Edwards averaged 3 YPC in Sep-Oct and he averaged 5 YPC in Nov-Jan.
Give Edwards 50 more carries in 2022 and his YPC keeps decreasing toward around 5. Give Edwards 50 more carries in 2023 and his YPC keeps going up towards around 5. Supposedly he's "playing well" in one case and not the other. I don't agree.
The thing you're saying should happen did happen. You just insist that 119 is meaningful of a guy playing bad or playing good because...that's all we get.
I'll give you another example -- Christian McCaffrey's monthly YPC this year were 5.9, 3.9, 5.1, and 6.6. We can assert that this is due to how well he played but more likely it's contextual and the contextual differences can swing YPC by 3 YPC even looking at samples of 60-80 carries each month. Even for a pro player at the height of his powers who should be a consistent as it comes. Derrick Henry a big strong tough running veteran - his monthly YPC ranged from 3.2 to 8.1. He went from 3.2 in Sept to 5.3 in Oct to 3.8 in November. This is a dude getting 50 to 70 carries a month and his YPC is varying dramatically from month to month.
Now I know you can argue that he's playing better or worse in these samples of 50 carries but I'm here to tell you that the math says it's completely acceptable that the play to play variance we see (EVERY GAME) extends out to 100+ carries still.
You can look at this variance even within a game - guys may show higher YPC in 3rd quarters than 2nd quarters, over an entire season. Edwards did - on the season as a whole. Does that tell you something? I'd argue it does not.
Why ANYONE draft just based on stats? I love analytics and I would not recommend this to everyone. If I was going on YPC alone I would stick Semaj Morgan at RB because he averaged 17 YPC as a runner. He's Giles Jackson but fast!
Better is better and worse is worse - absoutely. Donovan Edwards was better in 2023 than Kaleel Mullings and Blake Corum was better than Donovan Edwards in 2022. YPC tells you the opposite.
Your argument is no less "difficult" than mine. My argument is look at the playing time decisions. Your argument is look at YPC. Yet you'll toss aside YPC whenever it doesn't suit your narrative. That's "difficult" IMO.
"Yet you'll toss aside YPC whenever it doesn't suit your narrative."
DeleteYes...and you'll toss aside snaps and touches when it doesn't suit your narrative. When we watch games, we reach certain conclusions based on how the game plays out, how players perform, etc. The stats often back that up.
No one reading this needed stat lines to tell us that Blake Corum was better than Donovan Edwards, but the stats back up that conclusion. Nobody reading this needs stat lines to tell us that Roman Wilson is better than Cornelius Johnson, but the stats back that up.
But the stats can help to bring focus to things that are blurry. Star ratings, draft position, Combine times, stats, snaps, touches, etc. are all part of the picture.
Personally, I think we spend way too much time talking about yards per carry. It's a tool, not the ultimate decider. Just like completion percentage. And snaps. And catches. And tackles. And sacks. And tackles for loss. And yards per catch.
DeleteThere are 17 players who had more rushing yards than Blake Corum last year. Every one of them has a higher YPC than Blake Corum's modest 4.8 YPC. And Blake was running behind an elite OL with an elite QB and an elite coaching staff on top of that.
DeleteI would draft Blake Corum over all of them.
I would not trade any of them for Blake Corum and I bet you agree Thunder.
Better is better except when better is better.
Agree Thunder -- WAY too much time on YPC. It's a very rough tool.
Delete" you'll toss aside snaps and touches when it doesn't suit your narrative."
DeleteLike when? This is the genesis of my "trust the coaches" argument over the last several years. It's never been that they are always right but I think you'll struggle to find times where I called for anything different than the coaches decisions when it comes to snaps.
But theoretically I agree with you. It could happen. I did not like the Hoke/Borges approach on WRs but that was an all encompassing thing ranging from their choices in recruiting to how they used their WRs.
"No one reading this needed stat lines to tell us that Blake Corum was better than Donovan Edwards, but the stats back up that conclusion"
DeleteYPC in 2022 indicated that Edwards was better.
Their careers YPCs indicate that Edwards is better.
Better is better except when it's not.
Well, I just spent about 5-10 minutes scouring the discussion for insults and deleting them. Lank and je93, let's see if we can have civil discussions without insulting each other's intelligence. Nobody here is a "dummy" just because we disagree about a running back's performance or whatever.
ReplyDeleteLOL. My policy is the same as always - I'll be civil always up until the point JE starts - then I'll fire right back. He tends to get frustrated because he can't make his point and so it's name calling and insults.
DeleteI only agreed with Lank. His best & most accurate post, IMO ... but then he argued that too
Delete@ je93 9:21 p.m.
DeleteWell...there were a lot of words like "dummy" being tossed back and forth, unless someone hijacked your name.
No you're dumb JE! LOL. Permanent adolescence.
Delete@Thunder 1o:oo, Lank identified as that term. I merely affirmed his truth
DeleteI only did so on this thread, and only to that post in this thread
Its funny you think you're being clever. Telling on yourself always JE.
Delete