With National Signing Day looming in a couple days - and lots of recruiting movement - I wanted to catch up on some of the most recent happenings as Michigan tries to fill out its 2025 recruiting class. If you want a look at offensive recruiting, check it out HERE.
EDGE
COMMIT: Michigan gained the re-commitment of Oak Park (IL) Fenwick defensive end Nathaniel Marshall (LINK) earlier today. There has been some talk that Alpharetta (GA) Alpharetta edge Julius Holly might flip elsewhere, but as of this writing, he's still committed to the Wolverines.
KEEP AN EYE ON: Indianapolis (IN) Warren Central's Damien Shanklin was reportedly contacted once Bryce Underwood went public with his flip from LSU to Michigan, but Shanklin has since said he's solid with LSU. Michigan threw out an offer to Warner Robins (GA) Warner Robins edge Isaiah Gibson, a top-10 player and Georgia commit who surprisingly didn't have an offer from the Wolverines until the last couple weeks. Michigan has also stepped up its pursuit of Houston (TX) Mayde Creek edge Tobi Haastrup, a raw prospect who has taken official visits to Florida State, Michigan, Oregon, Texas Tech, and USC during the month of November. Ohio State decommit Zahir Mathis from Philadelphia (PA) Imhotep has also been contacted since he backed off his pledge to Ryan Day.
Hit the jump for more.
DEFENSIVE TACKLE
COMMITS: Howell (MI) Howell's Bobby Kanka has been committed to Michigan for a long time. Newburgh (IN) Castle defensive lineman Benny Patterson flipped from Cincinnati to Michigan last month.
KEEP AN EYE ON: Predictions have come in for Michigan to land Louisville (KY) Fern Creek defensive tackle Travis Moten, a former Western Michigan commit who took an official to Ann Arbor last week. New Orleans (LA) Edna Karr defensive tackle Jahkeem Stewart, the #16 overall player in the 247 Composite, was recently contacted by the Wolverines staff.
LINEBACKER
COMMITS: Stockbridge (GA) Stockbridge's Chase Taylor is Michigan's lone commitment at the position (LINK).
KEEP AN EYE ON: Pittsburgh (PA) Central Catholic athlete Bradley Gompers is committed to Duke, but Michigan has quietly been making inroads; Gompers was a high school teammate of Michigan true freshman Cole Sullivan and is a top-200 prospect in the 247 Composite. Bradenton (FL) IMG Academy's Nathaniel Owusu-Boateng has multiple predictions in favor of Michigan as the Wolverines have battled Notre Dame, USC, Texas, and others for his commitment; his brother played for the Fighting Irish before playing in the NFL.
CORNERBACK
COMMITS: Chester (VA) Thomas Dale's Shamari Earls (LINK) is the big fish at the cornerback position for Michigan, but Kilgore (TX) Kilgore cornerback Jayden Sanders is another 4-star commitment.
KEEP AN EYE ON: Michigan has continued to recruit Tampa (FL) Wiregrass Ranch cornerback Graceson Littleton as he decommitted from Clemson and then committed to Texas. Detroit (MI) Cass Tech's Alex Graham is currently committed to Colorado; some flip predictions came for him to join Michigan's class, but USC seems to have some momentum now.
SAFETY
COMMITS: Michigan has commitments from Washington (DC) Gonzaga's Kainoa Winston (LINK), Belleville (MI) Belleville's Elijah Dotson, and now Monroe (NC) Monroe's Jordan Young (LINK); the latter two flipped from Pitt and Clemson, respectively.
KEEP AN EYE ON: All three players seem solidly committed at this point, and I don't think Michigan will be pursuing any other safeties right now.
DB class is looking promising. If they can talk Rod Moore, Hillman, Curtis, Mangum, Berry, and Hill into all coming back the secondary should be in a good place in 2025. A starting caliber corner from the portal would be nice though.
ReplyDeleteSherrone Moore on WR recruiting size.
ReplyDelete"Yeah, I mean, that was an emphasis for me. I really wanted for us, add size and length. Really haven't had a big 6-5 guy since Nico Collins."
Sounds a lot like something Brady Hoke would say and something Jim Harbaugh would not say.
Collins had very good speed, by NFL standards let alone college. His 40 time was 4.45.
Deletehttps://www.mockdraftable.com/player/nico-collins
Obviously height/length are a nice bonus but emphasizing that over skill and speed is a glaring error, IMO.
Eh, it's not like he dismissed the need for route running, catching, blocking, etc. He's just looking to ADD size where we have none ... there were two passes in the last few weeks that went through Tyler Morris outstretched hands. Sure, ball placement could be better, but another inch or two and that goes from moderate to easy catch
DeleteIf Moore was repeating what Hoke's guy said, something about speed being overrated, then I would be bothered
Amarian Walker and Darius Clemons are not as good as Morris. The multiple extra inches don't help as much as you think.
DeleteAnd with inaccurate throws - bigger isn't better since the ability to adjust (agility and reaction time) are generally not correlated with size, and inversely coordinated if anything.
Jump balls are rare and even then, you're 6'5 TE isn't necessarily better than your 6'0 WR. The best I've seen on jump balls are Collins, Hemingway, and Gallon. Only 1 of those guys is particularly tall.
@ Lank 2:57 p.m.
DeleteThat's fine, but Cornelius Johnson was 6'3". We can't just pick out the tall guys who don't pan out and say, "See, being tall doesn't matter!" Not all 7-footers are great at basketball, but height is still important for the sport. Not all bazooka-armed QBs are good QBs, but arm strength matters.
Personally, I think it's ideal to aim to have a tall player with a large catch radius, a size mismatch. We've seen it pay off at Michigan with numerous 6'3"-ish players (Johnson, Braylon Edwards, Marquise Walker, David Terrell, etc.) and the 6'5" Nico Collins. And we've seen guys like that fail to make an impact, such as Jaron Dukes and Amorion Walker.
I could say the same thing about guys who are 5'11" or 6'0". Fredrick Moore hasn't done much, I'Marion Stewart was a non-factor as a freshman, Karmello English left after one year to go play FCS ball, Semaj Morgan hasn't exactly lit the world on fire, Tyler Morris was so-so, etc.
In an ideal world, I think it would be good to have your top three receivers be a 6'3"+ guy who can be a jump ball/box-out guy, a 5'11"-6'1" guy with some speed/route running ability, and a dynamic slot guy. That's why I think the early 2000s trio of Edwards, Jason Avant, and Steve Breaston was so awesome, because they had all three types of players.
Lank, read again: neither Moore (or I) calling for size first, size only ... just, ADD size to the other traits I listed above
Delete@jelly. Read the quote. Moore is emphasizing size and length. He said that. Not ability to catch. Not route running. Not strength. Not timing. Not speed. Not quickness. Not blocking.
Delete@thunder.
"I could say the same thing about guys who are 5'11" or 6'0". "
What thing would that be? I think that height is not a big factor, so I would say the same thing about having a 5'11 WR as I do about having a 6'5 WR - it's not important.
No one is arguing height isn't important for basketball. Someone IS arguing height isn't important for WRs. I mean, within reason - I don't think most 5'4 people are going to be fast and strong enough to play football very well - but if they are they can probably be good WRs.
Most WRs are 5'11 to 6'1 so that seems to be the sweet spot. It's not something you target it's just the normal height for people with the requisite athleticism play WR. Outside of that (shorter or taller) are getting more rare but there are plenty enough to not think about it one way or the other. I know that there are 7 foot people out there from watching basketball and I know they never play WR. It matters in basketball so you seek those guys out and see if they have the skills. It doesn't matter in football so you don't see it. Not even at the high school level - some tall guys may have the requisite skill but you're not putting anybody out there just because they are tall (whereas in basketball height is essentially a skill).
My ideal WR world doesn't really consider height, though I do agree that having a guy or two with catch radius is nice. That's typically covered by your TE (who are generally taller so that they can be heavier so that they can block as quasi-OL/quasi-WR) so you don't have to worry about it for WR either way. Deep threat WR might as well be Roman Wilson or Jeremy Gallon or Junior Hemingway as Cornelius Johnson.
Cornelius Johnson wasn't all that tall nor was he that good. Wilson and Bell were better. The other guys you mentioned were 20 or 30 years ago. Passing games have changed.
Edwards Avant and Breaston were awesome because they were 3 guys who had substantial NFL careers for many years and they were here at the same time. Not because they fit some kind of archetype. Our passing offense during that time wasn't even very good.
Anyway, we know roles can change for WR (for example Gallon moving from slot to outside WR or Avant switching from a complementary possession guy to go-to target after Edwards left) so locking in one guy to one role usually doesn't hold up when context changes.
The tallest WR in NFL history was 6'8.Harold Charmicael was very effective... back in the 70s when the pass game was very rudimentary.
DeleteIn today's game -- it doesn't happen. The tallest you see is 6'5. Why is that? If height is such an important thing.
The answer is it doesn't matter, or at least it doesn't matter enough to MATTER.
It matters for blocking though! That's why you see universally pretty tall OTs and TEs. It doesn't matter for catching - that's why you don't see very tall WRs very often. Just like you don't see very tall kickers very often. Or very tall CBs very often. Or very tall LBs very often. Or very tall RBs very often. Height just doesn't matter very much at these positions.
You can say height doesn't matter, but there were six NFC Pro Bowl receivers last year:
Delete6'2" CeeDee Lamb
6'4" D.K. Metcalf
6'5" Mike Evans
6'2" Puka Nacua
6'1" A.J. Brown
6'0" Amon-Ra St. Brown
Average height: 6'2 1/2"
Among the top 10 receivers in the NFL this season are 6'3" George Pickens, 6'4" Courtland Sutton, and 6'5" Nico Collins. Tee Higgins, Jauan Jennings, Drake London, Alec Pierce, Marvin Harrison Jr., Michael Pittman Jr., Rome Odunze, etc. are all 6'3" or 6'4".
Again...nobody's advocating for a roster full of 6'5" receivers. But sometimes height helps, and no, not just for blocking.
Okay, but here it is: "Yeah, I mean, that was an emphasis for me. I really wanted for us, ADD size and length. Really haven't had a big 6-5 guy since Nico Collins."
DeleteHe doesn't say 'no more speed, route runners or soft hands' ... he wants to ADD size to a room that lacked size (and playmakers). Maybe the SMASH coach watch Jeremiah Smith bury one of his defenders and got intrigued
"that's why you don't see very tall WRs very often"
Well, no one is saying we want VERY tall Receivers, or even a room full
This whole argument is based on misrepresentations of Moore's statement, and exaggeration of posts made since. Misleading, again
*we are more than likely to ADD a QB from the Portal. This does not mean we no longer want Bryce Underwood
*we want to ADD Haywood as a Tackle, but that doesn't mean we no longer want Babaloa
I could go on, but why bother? Things are trending up for the Maize & Blue,and I'm optimistic
@Thunder
DeleteI'm sorry but I can't take the selective NFC cherry-picking seriously. Every AFC WR was 6'2 or less. Like I said, most WRs are going to be around 6'0 or 6'1 plus OR MINUS an inch or two. That's the normal range. Theres some guys who are taller than that and there are some guys who are shorter than that, but not that many. Some of them are really good (like Collins and Tyreek Hill), but not that many. It's a bell curve with a peak right around 6'0-6'1.
Good luck providing any data that says being taller is being better than being shorter for WR. (IT IS, I acknowledge, all things else being equal, but I challenge anyone to prove it with data. All things are usually NOT equal.)
Anyway -- Nobody is arguing height is never helpful. It's helpful in jump ball situations. Jump balls are rare and low efficiency plays. Not something to seek out.
Somebody IS arguing that it's not worth seeking out height as a characteristic specifically. But if a guy can run and catch and block and all that....great, by all means have him be 6'5. I'd say the same about 5'5. It doesn't much matter to me. It's how you play not how you look.
Having a range of skills does matter. I definitely like to have a guy who can win contested balls consistently...like Jeremy Gallon or Junior Hemingway or Braylon Edwards. 3 guys who thrived at it, one at the middle of the WR height bell curve, one below it, one above it.
@jelllllly.
No mischaracterization. Moore said he wants to emphasize height. I think that's dumb.
The mischaracterization and exaggeration is yours, on the word ADD. Which WRs are coming back that we need to ADD to? Morgan is 5'10, Stewart is 5'11. Besides that you have Moore and Goodwin at 6'1, Bell at 6'2 and Walker and O'Leary at 6'3. Michigan is ADDing things it already has, except in the under 6'1 category.
Perhaps Moore's emphasis on height is why our #1 WR (who is under 6'0) is in the portal, less so than the speculated upon lack of passing opportunities. (Since Morris you know saw Wilson and Johnson and Bell get drafted without being in a pass heavy offense no problemo).
So yeah ADDing. There's more tall outside types to ADD to than there are short slot types. (I don't agree with the framing for the record, but acknowledge conventional thinking).
------------------------------
PS
The real loss to the WR room is Loveland since he spent something like half his time playing an outside receiver role, but I'm assuming that Hansen and other receiving TEs will still offer a big reliable target in 2025. And I'm happy to take BETS that neither of the two 6'3 WRs will be drafted as high as Loveland will be.
The mischaracterization & exaggeration is mine, the guy who used the EXACT words of our head coach ... but it's not the guy carrying on three days later, using his own interpretation ... delusional statement indeed
Delete#1WR, lmao ... that's statistically true, but meaningless since he had less than half the catches, yards & TDs as the top guy (who missed multiple games) ... this reminds me of when I pointed out the low PFF grades for the right side of our OL, and your reply was "3 of the top 5 PFF scores were OL,” ignoring three players AND that the scores were in fact low (59, 49 & 49) ... misleading is a form of lying
*if he stays in the Portal he won't be missed. If he returns, Tyler Morris will be at best (a distant) second option, but most likely third or fourth. That's how bad our receiver room was ... worse than even I thought
I quoted Moore. He said what he said. You want to twist it into something different thats on you jellly. Typical.
DeleteI quoted PFF scores and provided the link. You don't like the facts. That's on you jellly.
WR wasn't the problem this year because there wasn't a QB who could get them a ball. It MIGHT have been a problem if JJ McCarthy, Miller Moss, or hell, Shea Patterson was our QB in 2024, but we'll never know because it MIGHT also have also been the case that Loveland and Morris each had 800 yards+ receiving in that scenario.
Anyway, not an actual disagreement that the WR room wasn't good and that Morris, if he was to return, probably wouldn't be WR1 again in 2025. Not the point in this conversation, at all, but some people can't stay on topic and would rather dodge to arguing about some kind of fantasy.
You provided the quote from Moore, then ran off on your own agenda (fantasy), based on something he did NOT say
DeleteYou quoted an article that removed three PFF scores, and you ignored that 59 is not a good PFF score
Lack of highlight catches signal we didn't have playmakers at the position ... dropping a catchable ball from Bell in The Game is an example, as are two balls through the outstretched hands of Morris. WR yards after catch show that they couldn't do anything even if they did catch the ball ... I think the biggest was Morris in garbage time v NW. If there was another, it's easily forgettable
We need a #1WR because we have none, period ... almost a year later, you've conceded
Moore said he emphasized something and I don't think he should care about it at all. Only fantasy here is trying to spin this as something more complicated.
DeleteWhy you're talking about OL in this thread is a mystery to me. The point I remember is that someone said (in another thread completely LOL) they might have improved over the course of the season, in the context of evaluating Newsome. Who knows where this fantasy will go from here. I guess i'll just enjoy the ride.
"Lack of highlight catches signal we didn't have playmakers at the position"
Nah.
Michigan stopped trying to throw downfield entirely. Because the QBs sucked ass. Semaj and Tyler had more playmaking demonstrated in 2023 on way fewer snaps. Loveland too, even though he played more WR in 2024.
The Bell pass was successful. Should we call this example a "lie"?
Nobody said we had a strong #1 WR, ever. Another fantasy LOL. Hold up your imaginary W you though.
What was said - that you continue to "lie" about - is that we had playmaking but not proven production or reliability. This was a distinction between player and playmaker that was made repeatedly. You just want to argue.
At the same time you want to talk about Edwards as boom/bust. Playmaker vs player anyone? Not even you believe you.
The unanticipated thing was that it was wholly irrelevant how good or bad the WRs were because the QBs sucked. But you can't admit you are wrong no matter what because jelly gonna jellly.
Moore said he emphasized ADDING size ... you can disagree or have your own opinion without misrepresenting his words ... or can't you?
DeleteOL PFF was another example of you misrepresenting facts to make a point. I exposed your lie
Go ahead Lank: list three 2024 catches that belong on a WR highlight. I can go as far to say that our four best/toughest catches were INTs
"Tyler had more playmaking demonstrated in 2023" ... Morris had ONE, with coaches getting him against a LB
He couldn't catch the ball. Too small! Catch that ball, get in the endzone - make a play in The Game! Instead, we turned it over four plays later
But we didn't have playmakers. As I have asked repeatedly, compare our WRs to the competition: catches, yards, yards after catch, TDs. QB Excuses? Or, compare highlight plays then ... Context matters! What else could you go off of, you're feelings?
The three bad QBs contributed to WR issues, but were not the cause. When they got the chance, they didn't make tough catches. When they did catch the ball, they couldn't add yards. We had no playmakers, and are now looking for multiple Portal options to fix that
During the off-season I thought we needed another playmaker to go along with Loveland. You got all upset & turned it into a months long debate. I was right, by every objective measure available
*Hottake: Tyler Morris is the 2o24 version of Grant Perry
I think Tyler Morris is better than Grant Perry. I don't think the offense was designed well overall, nor do I think the QB play was up to Michigan's standards. Morris isn't going to go anywhere and be a superstar, and I was doubtful in the off-season when people said he looked like the next Ronnie Bell. I think he made a fine #3 receiver behind Cornelius Johnson and Roman Wilson, but when he was going to be the #1 guy...yikes.
DeleteI mostly agree with Thunder. I think Morris can be a quality starter (top 2 WR) especially in an offense that doesn't use them a lot.
DeleteI hope they recruit him back, but I don't think it's season-altering one way or the other, unless there are bigger than expected changes in offensive philosophy.
@jelllllllllllllllllly
Already covered your interpretation of "ADDING". He's adding people to the WR room, we know that. The WR room already has size (e.g., Walker, O'Leary), we know that. He said what trait he was focused on - size. Whatever semantic argument you are trying to make doesn't change the fact that he is thinking about size and highlighting size. I don't think that's a good thing to think about at all. You keep wanting to argue, forever and ever, but it's not complicated.
Have fun fantasizing or to put it in terms you might understand -- You are lying.
"The three bad QBs contributed to WR issues, but were not the cause"
You are lying. Your own definition. No evidence.
Michigan receivers made multiple tough catches against OSU. Warren's throws were inaccurate all day but O'Leary dug one out, for one example.
When they were given the chance, they did the job.
You are lying.
Morris and Morgan are playmakers -- they showed that in 2023. What changed in 2024 -- the level of QB play. You admit it on Morris, but you still want to argue.
You are lying.
You keep bringing it up - "playmakers" - over and over (rent free) and now you want to say "You got all upset & turned it into a months long debate".
Every accusation is an admission. AKA You are lying.
HOLD IT UP
Hottake: Tyler Morris is better than Cornelius Johnson and will show that in a head-to-head comparison of 4th year seasons (CJ had 499 yards and
@thunder, just a quick glance, but Morris & Perry have similar stats (edge to Perry), both playing with three QBs ... should he be better? Yeah. Has he made the plays to differentiate statistically? Nope
Delete@Lank, not my interpretation but Moore's quote "ADD size and length" ... those are his exact words ... the only one fantasizing is the guy pretending that means size would come at the expense of other WR traits
My evidence in the QBs not being the cause for WRs sucking is in their stats, including catches, yards after catch, and TDs, which you continue to dodge in favor of feelings
"Multiple" tough catches? Then, why is the only one you listed a pass that hit both hands? How many will the UFR grade as tough? Where is the context: compare our WR stats to opponents (not iowa) or highlight catches ... you'll dodge, again
When did I admit Morris was a playmaker? I said he made ONE play ... you're lying, while projecting on me
Rent free? Calling out your lies, exaggeration & hyperbole just come easily because you do it so often ... YOU do get upset, as evident by going on & on, despite switching sides; like the Washington D adjusting to the pass, or all our QBs sucking, or "being a playmaker doesn't mean they are good;" then referencing an MGo post that said Morris was good, but NEVER saying he's a playmaker
Twice in one day I've exposed you. You misrepresent what Coach Moore says, what I say, and even what YOU say ... You're upset because I own you. I live in your head, rent free
It's not pretending. You focus on something not everything. When you prioritizing one thing - you probably sacrifice on an other thing. Everybody is going to take the 7 footer who moves like Barry Sanders runs routes like Jerry Rice and has track speed, but that guy doesn't exist.
DeleteCheck ALL the boxes and you're a 5 star. 4 stars are probably going to have some limitations and what you emphasize (size, speed, skill) likely means you deemphasize (i.e., don't get something else). Cornelius Johnson was tall but wasn't that fast and had bad hands. Roman Wilson was fast but didn't catch a bunch of contested balls.
You make choices, based on what you emphasize. In real life there are tradeoffs.
We saw this with Hoke. He emphasized size. They did get hits on big receivers (Cheson and Darboh) who could play ball, but it required a good bit of skill development to get there. We saw the vast majority of their big WR targets lacked in speed and or skill and never got there. Damario Jones, Csonte York, Jeron Dukes, Drake Harris, Mo Ways. I don't know how many times I heard about guys winning jump balls during this time frame. Always a red flag. Instead we saw Gallon move from slot WR role to outside WR and Funchess move from TE to WR. Guys like Dileo and Roundtree continue to play.
----------------------------------------
Playmakers make plays.
"My evidence in the QBs not being the cause for WRs sucking is in their stats"
Those stats aren't evidence. So you are lying. By your definition.
"YOU do get upset, as evident by going on & on,"
Again, every accusation is a confession. I'm not upset but you are going on and on. So by YOUR definition.....
There's no "switching sides" on my part - just another one of your fantasies.
"PROBABLY" .... "LIKELY" ... in other words, while I used Moore's EXACT words, YOU are mischaracterizating, exaggerating and FANTASIZING ... not unlike with the Washington Defense, Live Reads, etc. It's okay to guess & assume, but to stubbornly insist YOU are right leads to all the lies ... EXPOSED, AGAIN
DeleteStats are objective indicators of performance (evidence). In the past we've gone to UFR/PFF, but even there our highest WR PFF is still bad, with the group bottom dwelling. I offered you an out, asking for highlight catches ... you failed, because all you have is your assumptions, feelings & lies
Put simply, you've been outsmarted. AGAIN
#quotes
#data
#evidence
I used Moore's quotes. You chose to ALL CAPS one word and twist what he said into an alternative meaning. AXSUALLY HES NOT REALLY EMPHSASIXNG WHAT HE JUST SAID HE IS EMPHASEEZING
DeleteMisrepresenting is lying -- every accusation is a confession!
This is funny because I'm just stating my OPINION
"Obviously height/length are a nice bonus but emphasizing that over skill and speed is a glaring error, IMO."
But you are all caps obsessed with Lank and have to argue that Moore isn't emphasizing one thing over another thing instead he's just electing to recruit all Randy Mosses from now on. I've had more interesting debates with toddlers.
Your grasp of stats and evidence is hardly better. Passing stats are dependant on QB AND receiver doing their job. You have failed to disentangle them and you're not built to know it. Exposing yourself once again.
time to fantasize/lie or dodge and deflect? flip a coin for jellllly next L. I'll be here, waiting and laughing.
“I think you’ve got to have you know, different we’ve got a plethora of options size-wise but getting bigger is something that we really want to focus on.”
Delete#counttheposts
#counttheLs
Three posts, almost an hour apart ... not even YOU believe you #rentfree
ReplyDelete@1:21PM
You took Moore's quote and created your own fantasy. Receipts above #probably #likely
I use his EXACT words
Now Moore wants Randy Moss? Who doesn't?!? No hottake: we'll most likely end up with taller versions of what we have, but no Randy Moss or even elite 4star ... we're RunFirstRunOften, and as I have repeated for three years now, that will cost us. The caliber WR will be in line with what it's been - only a little taller - until we prove we can get down field and earn the elite commits
I've asked for stats. I've asked for PFF/UFR. I've asked for highlights ... you got nothing but feelings
@2:12PM ... back for more because even YOU know you've lost
"What Moore said is what Moore said"
Yes, and he said "ADD" ... add to what? Hmmm ... to the other desirable WR traits???
You are entitled to your opinion, but pretending it's a fact is something I am here to call out, as always
@2:14PM
"getting bigger" ... does not read "getting slower, clumsier, or worse at catching ... otherwise , why practice? Maybe working the jugs machine gets us slower, hitting the weight room makes us shorter, or improved nutrition impacts our catching
#rentfree
#counttheposts
DeleteI was right!
LOL
Moore's exact words were to add height and length. NOT anything else. Your fantasy is all the other things still being part of the equation. He didn't say that! You ASSUME and ASSERT that is what he meant by "add" but that's you fantasizing. #lies exposed
Not even you agree with Moore as you have argued "we need playmakers". Not what Moore said he is focusing on. Guess he agrees with Lank in that regard.
Because he said ADD, not replace or substitute ...
Delete#tooeasy
I do want playmakers, but that's a different debate. Right now we're talking about Moore wanting to ADD height
Can't keep up, so you must lie