Tuesday, August 3, 2021

2021 Season Countdown: #33 Andrew Vastardis

 

Andrew Vastardis (image via MGoBlue)

Name: Andrew Vastardis
Height:
6'3"
Weight:
296 lbs.
High school:
Ashburn (VA) Stone Bridge
Position:
Center
Class:
Sixth year senior
Jersey number:
#68
Last year:
I ranked Vastardis #48 and said he would be a backup center (LINK).
TTB Rating:
N/A

I pegged Vastardis as a backup going into the 2020 season, and I was proven wrong immediately when he started the first four games of the year. To top it off, he was voted a captain. Unfortunately for him, he tried playing through injury but eventually missed the final two games of the year. In the meantime, his performance was decent but nothing special. Vastardis is a hard-nosed player and respected by his teammates, but he's neither big nor quick.

I'm not confident in this ranking, since it basically projects a starter, captain, and sixth year player to be a backup to a sophomore who has never played the position in a game, but word coming out of practice is that Zak Zinter will be the starting center. Of course, Vastardis's presence already helped chase one guy (Zach Carpenter) off to Indiana, so maybe Zinter will be the next Zach(k) to get his position yoinked by the former walk-on. But either way, Vastardis is a good guy to have as a veteran presence, whether he's a starter or backup.

Prediction: Backup center

18 comments:

  1. Vastardis has been a solid contributor for the last several years. Sticking around for year 5 would SEEM to indicate that he'll start somewhere along the line, in which case a higher ranking is probably warranted. But good to see that competition is healthy on the OL.

    That said, it would also be nice if it was limited to a couple spots and we had 2 or 3 experienced starters entrenched at their spots. 2020 got more people opportunities but no sense of continuity.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I didn't think much of vastardis last year. He was fine against Minnesota and their decimated DL - but so was filiaga. After that, he wasn't strong enough, and got handled (though not as bad as filiaga

    Anyway, that's two potential backup OL ahead of our backup QB ... Still not saying you're wrong, but imagine if we take an injury: which would make you cringe more?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My opinion:

      OL would be most concerning. Followed by QB with RB last.

      QB - just like OL, it's unclear if the starter is superior to the backup or will be replaced as the season plays out. But the traits are pretty similar in Bowman and McNamara - praised for accuracy and character but limited arm strength and a mixed history of on-field results. If it's McCarthy for some reason, presumably he has ascended over one of the above High-Floor options by merit and therefore should be pretty good. Unlike OL I think we can EXPECT there to be multiple starters during the season, regardless of injury.

      RB - setting aside my mantra about the position for a moment, this could arguably be the most impacted because you're slotting a true freshman into the rotation but... freshman RBs contribute all the time without major worries - it's not a position where experience is especially helpful. Furthermore, it's a position where there is heavy rotation - so not as impactful as a guy who plays every snap.

      OL - the level of impact obviously depends on who is injured but potentially it means you are shuffling guys around beyond just the spot that is impacted directly. So if it's Hayes for example you might have to move Steuber out to OT and slot in another guy at OG. One guy goes out and potentially everyone is playing beside a new man. And while OC is an open competition still - this can be highly unsettling to the offense rhythm to lose the guy making the calls. OTOH if you lose say Filiaga but replace him with a guy who he barely beat out 1 for 1 then it's not a big change. Because of all the uncertainty we really don't know, but an injury-induced OL change can have huge impacts on the offense and considering it's 5 guys it's more likely that there will be an injury at some point.

      If Vastardis is the starter at OC then it's certainly a bigger deal to lose him to injury than it is a freshman 3rd stringer at QB or RB. If he's a backup who comes in (6th man) then maybe not if the 7th man is similarly capable. That's a pretty big IF at OC though.

      -LANK

      Delete
    2. Not clear even if the presumed 3rd string RB will play more than 4th string RB. Both are unproven freshman and recruiting rankings have been notoriously poor predictors of RB production in recent UM history with the exception of Deveon Smith.

      -LANK

      Delete
    3. If Michigan loses a QB, there are still two qualified quarterbacks on the roster.

      If Michigan loses a center, there is one qualified center (if that) on the roster.

      Delete
    4. I'm not sure McCarthy is qualified just yet.

      OC is one of the most important positions on the offense. I think if anything Vastardis could be higher.

      Delete
    5. @ LANK 10:09 a.m.

      Lots of 5-star quarterbacks step in and play in their first year, such as Trevor Lawrence, JT Daniels, Bo Nix, Tua Tagovailoa, Shea Patterson, etc.

      Delete
    6. @Lank 1:18, good post. I agree with the importance of position groups. Just don't think Vistardis starts. Obviously glad to have depth at the Center spot, but if neither are any good, we'll be closer to 2020 than 2016 or 18

      Delete
    7. @Thunder

      1. MOST 5-star QBs aren't quality starters as freshman. Some are. Most aren't.

      2. PLAYING doesn't mean you're qualified, as we've seen with (not to pick on the kid but he's a good example) Russell Bellomy.

      3. We have more info on McCarthy because he enrolled early and participated in Spring. The coaches are very clear that he was well behind McNamara - who was not a good QB last year.

      One ignores info at their own peril. Derrick Green's 5th star got irrelevant pretty quickly. Not there yet with McCarthy of course but the likelihood of him being instant impact is down substantially from signing day.

      Delete
    8. @JE

      I hear your point that a mediocre player isn't making an impact. But that's not true if the backup is significantly worse. We have seen legit BAD players come in at Michigan when attrition hits.

      I also think you also have to consider disruption to the unit. If you can pop in Vastarids if Zinter is hurt there's probably limited damage to continuity. Last year we were throwing in guys who have never played a down and the offense struggled badly.

      The other perspective that I quibble with is the assumption that a solid-but-not-great vet is inherently inferior to a freshman. It's very optimistic (naively so IMO) to assume a frosh is going to come in and be an impact player. Player development is non-linear. For every freshman that is instant impact there is a vet who made a leap from meh backup to solid starter.

      Overall, I think it's unlikely this offense is at the level it was in '16 or '18. There is just not enough proven talent or continuity. There is good depth and plenty of options across almost every position group, but changing OL coaches is concerning and the QB spot is more likely to be "OK" than excellent. You never want RB to be your strongest position. Unless you're in the 20th century and Barry Sanders is on your team.

      Delete
    9. I'll add - while Zinter plays directly into Vastardis role, it's not necessarily just about just those two. Gattis has talked about a "best 5" and that's typically the way it goes. So even if Zinter is the best option at center, Vastardis might still start while Filiaga and other OGs are backups. Given Filiaga's struggles last year that might be impactful to season outcomes.

      With so much recent turnover on the OL this could be an especially good year to have a stabilizing vet, who has been in the system for a few years now, out on the field.

      -LANK

      Delete
    10. It'd be absolutely naive to assume a 5star TrFR would be more impactful than a 6thYr walkon OC with starting experience ... but that's not what I am saying

      The backup QB may be Bowman, but regardless, I think the backup plays a lot. Cade may or may not get hurt, but I just do not think he's good enough to not get pulled all season (unless he's the next Drew Brees 😏). I'm actually concerned that in year 7, this is only the second time the starting QB was decided before Fall camp

      As for Vastardis, he is a returning starter, but I thought he was really bad, and would not want him starting again. He wasn't as bad as Filiaga, but close. Too small, not quick enough, and simply not strong enough. Can that change in one off season? Probably, but most likely not

      Everything else, I agree with. OL is critical, and since Moore wasn't very good at coaching/developing TEs, I wonder how he's expected to do well with OL. Further, our OL was ravaged by injury & shuffling last year, and you're right it was devastating. But they weren't good while healthy. We couldn't move the ball against sparty, in game 2, with all 5 ready. Injuries just made it worse

      Delete
    11. I don't see any reason to worry about Cade being anointed QB1 heading into camp. We know JJ isn't ready and Bowman wasn't even here. Cade did all the off field stuff right it sounds like and that should be rewarded, at least symbolically. Especially if the team his behind him.

      I would not take it as he is being handed the job by default. He'll still have to hold on through camp, and he is famously "not a practice player". I assume he has to earn it unless Bowman is just not as good as I think (possible).

      In terms of naming a leader in public, I think there's no wrong answers here - some people need to be built up with support and others need to be challenged. We'll see how this group reacts. I get the sense the staff is trying to be more optimistic and encouraging in general. Given the run of transfers out that might be wise.

      I share your concern about OL overall but disagree that Vastardis was really bad. He's solid but limited - sometimes that's good enough to make an impact. If he gets beat out, that's probably a good thing for the team. If he doesn't it's not necessarily a bad thing. If he's starting at OG I'll probably worry, OC not so much.

      OL struggled some but Michigan wasn't that bad on offense against MSU. 450 yards, 300 in the air, 4.5 ypc, zero turnovers. They had too many 3 and outs and had 1 play over 20 yards and they relied too much on Milton and Charbonnet but it wasn't a disaster. Those came later in the year with injured QBs and patchwork OLs.

      But yes, the 1st string OL wasn't great last year. In a sample of 2 they were great against a terrible front and mediocre to bad against a good front. Remember they also weren't supposed to be very good yet with 4 new starters replacing guys who went off to the NFL. Still they dominated Minnesota like no one else - it took OT for Wisconsin to score 20 points on the Gophers.

      It's certainly plausible that the OL would have gotten better as the season progressed had they stay healthy and, you know, had a real season. They haven't been just sitting on their butts since then.

      So while it would be naive to expect a top flight unit I think it's also pessimistic to look at last years MSU game and assume we'll struggle all year based on that.

      Sadly for us, MSU always puts their best foot forward against UM.

      Delete
    12. A backup QB will end up starting games -- that should be the default expectation every year, regardless of how entrenched the starter is or how good the OL is.

      Just a reality of modern football where QBs are expected to throw 50 times a game, run the ball regularly, and operate offensive schemes that deliberately leave defenders unblocked. The unintended consequence of high volume pass heavy offenses is that QBs are more exposed to hits than ever. I'm honestly surprised we haven't seen more QB rotations or selective substitutions across the country.

      But yeah - even more true given our shared lack of certainty about Cade.

      Delete
  3. Is it true Nick Saban is making a heavy move to get Deone Walker, and may have already gotten him?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't know about any silent commitments, but yes, Alabama sent him an official offer, which is kind of a big deal.

      Delete
    2. Going to Alabama is a great opportunity for him.I"d rather he'd go to Michigan. But I'll understand if he chooses Alabama. I was watching videos of him. He said he lost 20 lbs so he would be quicker. And it shows. He is very quick now. He is blowung by players sometimes at camps now.But he's still really big, 340. Nick Saban wants a 340 player who is very quick. Michigan does too, I'm sure. But it would make sense if he chose Alabama with the way Michigan is right now.

      Delete
    3. I think Walker said he's down to about 320, but I could be mistaken.

      Delete