 |
| Maurice Hurst, Jr. (image via MGoBlog) |
Height: 6'2"
Weight: 281 lbs.
High school: Westwood (MA) Xaverian Brothers
Position: Defensive tackle
Class: Redshirt sophomore
Jersey number: #73
Last year: I ranked Hurst #41 and said he would be a backup nose tackle. He made 3 tackles, 1 tackle for loss, and 1 blocked extra point.
Hurst earned quite a bit of buzz during the spring of 2014 and in practice last season, but it never translated into a great deal of playing time. He appeared in eight games and made 3 tackles total. However, he was not one of those guys who made all his tackles against Appalachian State and then disappeared. His TFL came against Notre Dame, his extra point block came against Rutgers, etc. This is a player who appears to be working his way up the depth chart the old-fashioned way - by earning it in practice, having some success on the field, and showing why he should be on the field.
Hurst spent the spring game making David Dawson look silly and getting in the backfield, so that may mean good things are on their way. Unfortunately, Hurst plays a position where Michigan has a lot of depth, including redshirt junior Ryan Glasgow and sophomore Bryan Mone, not to mention redshirt junior Willie Henry, who can play nose tackle or 3-tech tackle. While nobody has proven to be a star just yet, there is potential for a couple of these guys to earn accolades and raise their draft status. I like Hurst as a situational pass rush guy, but his size is a question mark for an every-down player on the nose. I expect him to improve his stock incrementally this season.
Prediction: Backup nose tackle
It seems like Hurst has the quickness to play 3-tech. Why aren't we putting him there?
ReplyDeleteMy thoughts exactly. i see Glasgow/Mone at NT and Henry/Hurst at 3T. I'm surprised to see him listed as a NT in this preview. Can you explain the positions in this defense more Magnus? And how you see the rotation playing out?
DeleteI also agree...3T
DeleteI think the NT and DT are pretty interchangeable. I just see Hurst playing more in pass rushing situations, where it makes sense to put him at nose tackle. It's the same reason that the previous staff liked to play Mike Martin, Jibreel Black, etc. at NT in pass rushing situations.
DeleteMy guess is that Wormley, Charlton and Henry make more sense as the interior linemen in pass rush situations. Henry just because he's such a force to be reckoned with. Charlton because he's both long and fast - important for batted passes and disrupting the QB. Wormley's a bit of both when he's on his game. Both Charlton and Wormely have done the job before. Throw Godin in there too, as he's 6'6 - so his arms should be a factor as well.
DeleteI look at Hurst and dream of Timmy Davis, only 70 lbs heavier. I'm hoping Mattison has been breaking out Bo's old Middle Guard technique tapes and has been giving Hurst the crash coarse. some penetration from our interior defensive line would be a real nice change of pace around here.
ReplyDeleteI'm with you on this one. Good rank and I agree with placing him as the #4 guy in the NT/DT group.
ReplyDeleteThe only part I don't get completely is the 1-tech vs 3-tech stuff. I understand the NT/1T is supposed to be a bigger guy - an immovable object who holds down the middle of line and stuffs the run while the DT/3T is supposed to be a quicker/lighter penetrator. I also get that on 3rd and long those roles evaporate.
Here you list Hurst's role as a pass-rushing NT. So how is that different from just using a DT/3T like Henry in passing situations, and what precludes Hurst from being used as both a DT/3T on standard downs and NT/1T on passing downs?
In other words, if Hurst is 'just' a NT isn't his role going to be very limited? On the other hand, if he is a NT/DT (like Henry) Hurst could/should see significant snaps and fight with Godin for a firm spot in the interior rotation.
He can play both. I think Henry is more of a 3-tech because he's very difficult for one guy to block, since he can beat you with speed or quickness.
DeleteFWIW I tend to view the DTs as a jumble of guys for two positions, not unlike WR in that, yeah, some guys may be better fits at X, Y, or Z, but the skills tend to overlap and guys can move around situationally and depending on matchups. That's not to say Mone is going to be be a 3-tech or Godin is going to be lining up at nose, but most of our guys can work at either spot.
ReplyDeleteNo way is Hurst a credible Big Ten NT at 280..not even close. Even with a lot of quickness (which he hasn't shown yet), he's smallish for a 3-tech. He'll get some rotation snaps, but he's got some developing to do before he's ready for prime time.
ReplyDeleteJust as an example, Maryland's #1 NT last year was 6'1", 275 lbs. The #1 DT was listed at 6'0", 265 lbs. The latter (Andre Monroe) made 61 tackles, 14 tackles for loss, and 10 sacks. Defensive tackles don't need to be huge in the Big Ten, especially with the proliferation of the spread offenses. There are other ways to succeed.
DeleteI think the jury is still out. Hurst looked absolutely unblockable the last two spring scrimmages. But I also thought he looked pretty far from being regular player in his back-up snaps last season. There was a game where he got a few series of playing time early in the year (can't remember which) and he was more or less man-handled on the interior. Agree that he gets more PT as a pass rush specialist this year. Hopefully he can push Henry to be more consistent as well. UM actually lined Hurst up at DE in the spring for some snaps and he actually looked pretty good there. He should give them some versatility either way.
DeleteAny time that I hear I guy is "unblockable" in practice, I'm always doubtful (especially against our Oline), That never seems to translate into performance when it matters, and makes me wonder what the people who reported that were watching.
DeleteIt is indisputable that UM's OL could not handle Hurst the last couple spring scrimmages. We are not talking about some cryptic report from a practice observer watching drills - we all saw it on TV. But it is agreed that whether that translates into game situations against starting OL units is TBD.
DeleteSorry, Baloney. Maryland's #1 NT was Darius Kilgo, and he was listed at 310. Andre Monroe was a DE, not a 3 tech, and he was listed at 282, not 265. Why are you making shit up?
ReplyDeleteHere is the source of my information:
Deletehttps://maryland.rivals.com/cdepthtext.asp
It's from Maryland's Rivals site and was updated September 18, 2014, which was during last season.
Come on, Thunder...you can do better than that. Why are you going to Rivals and not UM's own athletic website? Here is the press release from the Maryland SID for their Rutgers game on November 29th:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.umterps.com/fls/29700/pdf/football/gamenotes/RU14.pdf?SPSID=716325&SPID=120713&DB_OEM_ID=29700
As noted, this is information put out BY the university, on their own website, and it is far more up to date and accurate than what Rivals has. Bottom line, Maryland's NT last year was NOT weighing in at 275. My original point stands...Hurst is too small to be a Big Ten NT.
Official websites are notoriously tricky about posting official lineups, starters, etc. My information might have been wrong, but I don't make shit up.
Delete