COMMITMENTS
I created commitment posts for the following players:
- QB Alex Orji (LINK)
- WR Darrius Clemons (LINK)
- WR Amorion Walker (LINK)
- DE Derrick Moore (LINK)
- S Keon Sabb (LINK)
Andrew Paul - RB - Dallas (TX) Parish Episcopal: Paul is a 5'11", 220 lb. prospect with offers from Auburn, Colorado, Michigan State, and TCU, among others. He's a 3-star, the #89 running back, and #1210 overall. As a senior in 2021, he exploded for 2,612 rushing yards on 271 attempts for 41 touchdowns on the ground. He also caught 14 passes for 208 yards and 3 touchdowns. This production included over 1,000 yards rushing in three playoff games.
Hit the jump for Paul's highlights and more.
OFF THE BOARD
Hays (KS) Hays linebacker Jaren Kanak flipped from Clemson to Oklahoma, following defensive coordinator Brent Venables to his new spot as the head coach of the Sooners.
Arizona State transfer running back Deamonte Trayanum committed to Ohio State . . . to play linebacker. Michigan had offered him, basically to replace thumper Hassan Haskins. Trayanum is originally from Akron (OH) Hoban, so it wasn't too surprising that he picked his home state school.
That's quite a development with Trayanum. I wish him the worst of luck.
ReplyDeleteI have nothing against recruiting a thumping RB, especially one who could play some FB. However, with Dunlop and Stokes, I think we should be developing this role with who we have and keep a spot open for a blue chipper in 2023.
I'm not sure 4 RBs is enough. We lost two last year, and - if our identity is to remain Harball - we'll need more than a RSFr and a TRFr (who cuts more than lowers his shoulder) in reserve
ReplyDeleteMaybe won't be enough but it's never been a problem before. Not once in Harbaugh era has RB depth been a problem (nor the previous eras).
DeleteLost 2 last year (both NFL caliber) replaced them with two freshman. Problems? None.
Best rushing season in how many years...
Freshman are fine. We use them every year. Sophomores more than fine.
Running game success will hinge on replacing Vastardis and Steuber. No individual standouts on the OL, supposedly, but that's a lot of experience going out the door. Oluwatimi decision is HUGE.
@ Lank 3:20 p.m.
Delete@ Lank 3:20 p.m.
"Freshmen are fine."
2021: Donovan Edwards 2.56 YPC vs. Big Ten
2020: Blake Corum 2.96
2017: O'Maury Samuels 1.43
2015: Karan Higdon 1.73
Nobody else puts up numbers that low. You don't see junior running backs running for 2.0 yards per carry, except maybe Ross Taylor-Douglas, who spent the first part of his career playing defense.
Yes, there are exceptions (such as Zach Charbonnet and Chris Evans), but saying "freshman running backs are fine" is simply not accurate. Even some guys who turned out to be pretty good (Corum, Higdon, Haskins, etc.) were not ready to play as freshmen.
Lol, he knows
DeleteAs such, expect 5-10 posts on several threads (some contradicting), spread out through the day
If no one responds, he'll get lonely, reimagine & misrepresent opposing views, and then fall back to name calling. All in a desparate attempt to reignite his lost debate
Sad!
@Thunder
DeleteFreshman are fine in general. Not every freshman. Most freshman. Evans and Charbonnet are exceptions, they're typical. Haskins (who changed positions) is an exception.
It's funny that you think Edwards is NOT fine. He is far better than fine and he showed that as he stepped in for Corum against Maryland and OSU and we won handily with him.
It's funny that you think Corum was not fine last year. He sent Charbonnet packing and made Michigan fans complain that Evans was underutilized.
Your overreliance on YPC undoes your argument. If you want to think that simplistically well then here you go. Other Freshman YPCs:
Christian Turner 4.8 ypc
Vincent Smith 5.8 ypc
Deveon Smith 4.8 ypc
Ty Isaac 5.9 ypc
Omary Samuels isn't a good back, as a freshman or now. Like Derrick Green.
You can definitely count on freshman and sophomore to produce at RB. Happens all the time. It's happening now.
@JE
DeleteAnd yet here you are responding again. With insults.
Are we expanding the discussion to sophomores now? When did that happen?
DeleteSmith had 3.4 YPC vs. the Big Ten in 2009. Derrick Green was at 3.0.
LOL @ the Haskins comment. He was such a good running back, I guess, that Michigan had him play linebacker. A guy who can't even play the running back position as a freshman does NOT count as a guy who is a "fine" running back as a freshman.
I think I've definitively shown that you can NOT count on freshman running backs to produce. There are numerous examples of them producing very poorly, and there are plenty of examples of them not doing anything at all (a.k.a. redshirting).
If you have a freshman who can step in and play well, you're lucky. Most aren't capable of pulling that off.
@Thunder
DeleteI'm agreeing that Haskins was not ready as a freshman at RB...because he was busy playing LB. He's an exception.
Green and Samuels issue wasn't they weren't ready as freshman - it was that they were not good. Samuels averaged 3.1 ypc as a backup at NMSU and Green 3.7 ypc as a backup at TCU...as seniors.
Freshman play every year and the majority do well. Let's go through the entire Harbaugh era...
2021: Freshman RB steps in for injured primary back with 180 yard day against Maryland and keeps producing vs OSU and Iowa. Edwards is good.
2020: Freshman RB ends up winning backup job over NFL drafted RB and All Conference Pac 12 starter. Corum is good.
2019: Freshman RB wins starting job, backed up by RS freshman position switch. Charbonnet is good.
2018: Freshman RB averages 4.8 ypc in 4th string role. Turner is adequate (4.0 ypc as senior backup at Wake)
2017: Bad senior RBs are bad RBs as freshman. Walker/Samuels are bad and transfer where they are still inconsequential.
2016: Freshman RB earns backup job over Higdon and Isaac. Evans is good.
2015: Freshman RB isn't ready (score one for Thunder!) behind Smith, Isaac, Johnson, and others. Higdon was bad but became good later.
So it's year 7 and you have to go back to year 1 to prove your point. Meanwhile there have been 4 very good RBs who all played a major role as freshman. Beyond that a few guys who were what they were from day 1. The only guy who wasn't ready to be an asset as a freshman RB and became one is Higdon (and Haskins because he wasn't playing RB.)
Even in Higdon's case there were more than a half dozen viable RBs on the roster, which was pretty dumb and has since been fixed by the staff.
Most RBs have it or they don't. Most will improve (ball security, pass pro especially) but you can usually count on them to play a significant role right away if they are decent players. It happens more often than not and usually the not is when they aren't really needed anyway (e.g., how Edwards didn't need to play much this year until Corum was hurt).
So yeah, you can point to exceptions like Higdon or go back to Toussaint and say some RBs aren't ready as freshman... but most are. It's not a matter of luck. It's an expectation. It gets late early at RB which is why you see a lot of attrition at that position not just now but going back to the 90s.
If you don't like looking at it by year. Pick all the RBs who have been starters for Michigan. How many were not contributing significantly as freshman RBs? Higdon (deep position group), Haskins (playing a different position), Toussaint are exceptions. Most others did.
You can chop YPC down to small samples to tell whatever story you want. You've been doing that for years and respond in kind. It doesn't tell the story you insist it does.
Blake Corum alone should be more than enough to show you the flaw in your rationale. His YPC was very small in 2020, yet there he was getting equal or greater snaps to Charbonnet and Evans by seasons end. This is the decision that Harbaugh and Gattis made. Those guys know what they are doing.
@Thunder
DeleteThe sophomore comment is in response to JE's original post about "we'll need more than a RSFr and a TRFr". Regardless of who played more or less than 5 games in 2021, we'll presumably have 2 sophomores (Edwards and Dunlop) and 1 freshman (Stokes) next year as backups to Corum. Which I think is perfectly fine.
Given my comments above about Having It or Not, I do worry about Dunlop. But perhaps he can develop like Higdon. We'll see. If Michigan adds another back I think the writing will be on the wall for him.
Haskins was playing linebacker because Jim Harbaugh thought he would be better off at linebacker than running back. This is not indicative of somebody who would have been ready to play running back as a freshman.
Delete"He arrived in Ann Arbor planning to play running back, until Harbaugh suggested he move to defense."
https://www.mlive.com/wolverines/2019/10/hassan-haskins-the-michigan-running-back-who-hits-like-the-linebacker-he-once-was.html
Blake Corum did diddly squat in 2020 as a freshman. I know he wasn't ready to play, because he wasn't good when other people were.
Yes, the coaches decided to play him. That doesn't mean he was ready.
You're arguing this in the same breath that you're arguing "Michigan coaches know what they're doing."
If Michigan coaches KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING AND ARE RIGHT ALL THE TIME, then how does one explain that Hassan Haskins spent his freshman year at linebacker?
You can't have it both ways. You can't sit there and basically say they played Haskins at the wrong position as a freshman and then say "These coaches cannot be questioned in regard to their decision about Corum/Charbonnet."
Moral of the story (once again): These coaches are certainly very good (CFP in three days! Yay!), and yet they are also very capable of making mistakes.
Haha, nailed the prediction
Delete@Thunder
DeleteYou are implying here that the coaches made a mistake by playing Corum in 2020? Based on YPC?
It's like groundhog's day around here.
When Michael Cox ran for 8.9 ypc on 19 carries at Michigan you said the coaches made a mistake...he went on to run for 3.6 ypc at UMass.
When Ty Isaac ran for 6.8 ypc on 30 carries in 2015 you argued he was underutilized, and each year thereafter he ended up finishing the season deep on the depth chart. The NFL ignored him and the second tier pro leagues didn't play him either.
When Blake Corum ran for 3.0 ypc on 26 carries, you said he didn't deserve the hype and, now, that he "wasn't good". He went on to average 6.7 ypc the following year and rated out as one of the best RB in the country.
Now, some people at this point would reconsider their simplistic approach and learn from their mistakes. But you are choosing to double down and claim that Corum was bad and that Edwards is bad. And you still insist that Cox and Issac are misused.
The coaches were right. Small sample YPC was definitively NOT a predictor of future performance.
@Thunder re: Haskins
DeleteI didn't say Haskins played the wrong position. Playing LB wasn't a bad thing. It worked out well. Like playing Winovich at TE worked out well. Like playing Brandon Graham at DT worked out well. Is it a coincidence that the toughest runner since Deveon Smith played some LB? I think not.
I'm not arguing he was ready as a RB as a freshman. He might have been useful he might not, it doesn't matter. Michigan already had Karan Higdon, Chris Evans and a bunch of other guys.
My point on Haskins freshman year is really simple - you can't be good at RB if you're playing LB. Your takeaway is that Haskins doesn't make your case for you. Because a) he didn't play the position you claim he wasn't ready at and b) Michigan had 6 or 7 other guys who did and thus didn't need him to even attempt it.
Surely Haskins got better over time. Was he incapable of contributing as a freshman? We don't know. Your speculation, given your track record at RB, isn't compelling.
@Thunder
DeleteAgain back to Corum. You are acting like you are right but you are definitively wrong.
"Blake Corum did diddly squat in 2020 as a freshman. I know he wasn't ready to play, because he wasn't good when other people were. Yes, the coaches decided to play him. That doesn't mean he was ready. You're arguing this in the same breath that you're arguing "Michigan coaches know what they're doing."
Corum was good. That's why the coaches played him. They knew what they were doing. They knew it. You didn't. They were right. You were wrong.
And to be more blunt - the coaches weren't alone here. You noted the hype in the preseason and some of it came from fans who watched Corum in 2020. How he moved. What he did. How he caught the ball. That he was put in to return kicks. etc.
The workload the coaches gave him was FAR more meaningful than his YPC. What we saw in 2020 told us to expect big things in 2021. You didn't see that and the weird part is that you still insist on not seeing it.
The best Michigan RB in decades and you say he wasn't good as a freshman and questioned the hype coming into sophomore year. All because YPC.
The coaches got it right.
@ Lank
DeleteBoy, this is a really convoluted argument.
I liked Michael Cox because he a) ran for 8.9 YPC and b) looked good doing it.
You liked Blake Corum because he looked good while running for 2.96 YPC.
You say Michael Cox wasn't good, but you also say the NFL is a better determining factor of talent than recruiting rankings or even college production.
You also say running backs don't matter, but I've gone through the UMass running backs from the Michael Cox year and pointed out how much better he was than anyone else.
Yet Thunder is wrong and Lank is right. Running backs are only good if Lank says so. We will only apply the logic that Lank feels like applying today.
And here's the kicker: Not long ago, I made the argument that Rich Rodriguez had a lot of talent at running back. You said he didn't because Carlos Brown/Brandon Minor/Michael Shaw/whoever else didn't play in the NFL.
You know who DID play in the NFL? MICHAEL MOTHERF***IN' COX.
If we're going by recruiting rankings, the 2008 running back room was talented.
If we're going by college production, the 2008 running back room was talented.
If we're going by NFL draft/production, the 2008 running back room was talented.
If we're going by Lank's convoluted logic...the 2008 running back room had no talent.
@Thunder
DeleteSure it's convoluted...if you twist things around into things I didn't say.
Cox was talented but ineffective. You showed me the ypc for a 5'8 receiving back. I showed you ypc that showed how Cox was easily replaced the following year by a nobody.
And even if it was true that Cox was talented and substantially better than other RBs despite a meager YPC....it didn't matter! They won one game Thunder!
Corum got more than a quarter of his freshman carries against the elite Wisconsin D. Cox got his against cupcakes. Context matters. But not the way you see it...
You didn't bring up Cox when you said RR inherited RB talent. You did bring up recruiting rankings. Cox is the best argument but his recruiting ranking was bad. So who is making convoluted argments?
The 2008 RBs were not talented by college production nor by NFL production. You're making stuff up. You would never say Mark Huyge shows that the OL had talent or Steve Watson shows the TE room has talent because you're reasonable about other positions... but on RB you're off your rocker.
-LANK
"Context matters," but let's pretend special teams play & garbage time snaps mean Harbaugh is entrusting walk-ons and TrFR RBs with his smash mouth style of football
DeleteWhat was that you said about it being sad when somebody makes up arguments?
DeleteI said it was sad that you desperately argue, and when no one responds, you sink to insults, hoping someone will join back in
DeleteIt's a sign of loneliness. But don't worry, we're here for you Lank
@ Lank 8:23 p.m.
Delete"You would never say Mark Huyge shows that the OL had talent or Steve Watson shows the TE room has talent"
Steve Watson, the guy who had 1 career catch for 9 yards? Do you have any idea how ridiculous your argument is? You compared a tight end with 1 career reception to running backs who ran for 1,000+ yards at Michigan (Minor, Shaw, Brown) and a guy who got drafted to and played in the NFL (Cox)?
Ohhhhhhhhhh.....so you're saying Blake Corum had bad numbers because he played against Wisconsin? Okay, let's fix that. Let's take out his numbers against that elite Wisconsin defense.
19 carries, 72 yards, 3.8 YPC. Still bad. Oops.
Just for fun, though, let's check out what the other backs did against Wisconsin in 2020:
Zach Charbonnet: 3 carries, 21 yards, 7.0 YPC
Hassan Haskins: 1 carry, 6 yards, 6.0 YPC
Blake Corum: 7 carries, 5 yards, 0.7 YPC
Well, poo. It appears he just wasn't very good when - wait for it - other guys were.
Just like when Haskins ran for 6.2 YPC, Charbonnet ran for 6.2 YPC, Evans ran for 4.6 YPC, and...Corum ran for 3.0 YPC.
Corum wasn't good in 2020. Sorry.
(But he was talented. After all, he was a 4-star recruit.)
@Thunder
DeleteYou are painfully wrong.
http://www.annarbor.com/sports/um-football/journeyman-steve-watson-sets-michigan-football-record-for-positions-now-looking-for-just-1-in-nfl/
Watson got an NFL camp invite which is more than you can say about Shaw and most of the other RBs you overrate.
You'll claim Cox has talent - because the NFL was interested in him, despite a lack of production, despite not much recruiting, but if that holds up for a nobody at another position...it's crazy.
Now you're diving deeper into ypc based on 3 carries and 1 carry. Like that time you said Ty Isaac should play more because he got 1 carry for 7 yards. How'd that go? LOL.
Corum was good. The coaches didn't make a mistake in playing him. They've been proven correct.
Well, I know this. Zach Charbonnet could have had about 20 more carries for 0 yards and still had a better YPC average than Corum.
DeleteSmall sample size? Corum had more carries than any other running back in that game, and he gained fewer yards than anyone!
And even if you take away that one abysmal game, HE HAD A LOWER YARDS PER CARRY THAN ANYONE ELSE.
This isn't hard to figure out unless you're so entrenched in your position that you ignore math.
P.S. I'm sure - absolutely certain - that Steve Watson's invite to Denver Broncos camp had nothing to do with the fact that his dad played for the Broncos and was a Pro Bowler. It's total coincidence.
DeleteMike Shaw sucked so much that he...was signed by the Redskins as an undrafted free agent.
Facts matter.
YPC doesn't tell the story you insist it does. You keep pulling out these stats and then I pull out a different sampling of stats and no one changes their minds.
DeleteIf you don't like the Watson example you can use Huyge or the many other marginal players who get camp invites. You'll insist that Channing Stribling lacks talent yet he'll bounce around the NFL and pro leagues for years.
Meanwhile these RBs who get far less NFL interests are real talents, underutilized at Michigan, and underappreciated by the NFL. It's almost like you have a systematic bias towards that position...
I'll admit I didn't know that about Shaw but uh....this entry in Wikipedia doesn't sound very impressive. He was cut on day 1 of rookie camp.
Washington Redskins
Shaw was signed as an undrafted free agent by the Washington Redskins on April 29, 2012.[14] He was released by the Redskins on May 4, 2012, the first day of the team's rookie mini-camp.[15]
Getting invited to camp because your dad was a Pro Bowler for that team doesn't sound that impressive, either.
DeleteI already lined up the argument for the running backs, from recruiting profile to production at Michigan to interest/participation in the NFL. There are several examples.
I'm not sure that I ever said Stribling lacked talent.
Oddly enough, a week or two ago, I saw Mike McCray post a video on Twitter of Jabrill Peppers returning that punt for a TD against Rutgers. And McCray called out Stribling for lollygagging and not blocking anyone on the play, which pretty much reinforced my main criticism of Stribling: he wasn't physical.
https://twitter.com/CoachMcCray9/status/1473724855216492545
That's FBS linebacker, former Notre Dame GA, and current FBS outside linebackers coach for UMass Mike McCray who's echoing my criticism of Stribling.
Short version: most years Michigan has freshman who can play and play pretty well. This demonstrated by recent history and long term history.
ReplyDeleteIn the unusual event they don't, it's usually because they whiffed in recruiting and that player won't ever be good (Green, Walker, Samuels).
Shorter version: Michigan has good freshman running backs except when they don't.
DeleteMichigan has good freshman running backs whenever they need them.
DeleteMost years they don't.
"RBs don't matter," but "here's another day's worth of insisting which ones do, how, and why"
ReplyDeleteToo easy
Part of the argument for RBs don't matter is that you can plug in a freshman or walk-on to do the job.
DeleteMichigan keeps plugging in freshman and they keep playing playing well.
RB depth concerns are a fantasy. Carted out again and again and never a problem.
We don't need to throw a bunch more scholarships at a position that is better than ever with fewer of them.
It's not a bug it's a feature.
Coaches are always right AND Blake Corum is the best running back Michigan has had in decades.
DeleteInteresting.
2020: Blake Corum #2 in carries
2021: Blake Corum #2 in carries
So either the coaches are wrong...or Blake Corum isn't the best running back on Michigan's team THIS YEAR, let alone in decades.
You're an intelligent guy, Lank, but sometimes it's like you say stuff just to say stuff. You insist you're right about a lot of things, but you can't possibly be right about all those things because the things you say contradict each other.
LOL. There's zero contradiction.
DeleteCorum is the best back in decades is my speculation - he's only a sophomore. Maybe I'm wrong on that but that's what it looks like to me this year, even more than last year. That's opinion. But even if it was proven out to be accurate and he goes on to win a Heisman and be an NFL all pro...
The coaches gave Corum an equal share of snaps as Haskins until he got hurt. That's not a mistake that's just smart coaching. Haskins is good too. It's more beneficial to rotate than not. '97 '16 '21. Bush & White.
The last great RB at Michigan IMO was Biakabatuka - he split carries too. That wasn't a mistake either.
Last year they shared snaps as well...and Evans and Charbonnet were good as well. Corum was as good as them. Already, as a freshman. People SAID the coaches were wrong - that Jay Harbaugh was mismanaging things, that ZC or CE should have played more, but no - the coaches were right. Corum proved that they made the right call this year.
It's just funny to me how you are flipping sides on this stuff. When Deveon Smith was here I told you about the value of guy who made his own extra yards while you argued playmaking is what really counts. I argued about how context matters and ypc doesn't tell you everything and Smith deserved those carries. Now we have a playmaker and a grinder and you prefer the grinder suddenly. You say Edwards is not good and Corum was not good. Smith... sorry Haskins, is the man now.
The playmakers are here! Let's celebrate that, not put them down.
The grinder still gets the ball! Not a bad thing. It's fun to watch like it was in 2016.
All these backs look good when you have the best OL in the country. Because that's what matters. Not how the snaps or carries get broken out at RB amongst a bunch of good options.
Moar feelings!
Delete@ Lank 7:17 p.m.
DeleteYou're misrepresenting my argument. I'm not really even sharing my feelings on Haskins/Corum. I'm pointing out the flaws in your argument. You're saying Corum is the best running back in decades, but he's been #2 in carries for two years in a row. That doesn't make sense. Regardless of how I feel about Haskins, he's clearly the #1 back - because he's had the #1 most carries for two straight seasons.
Corum wasn't good in 2020. It doesn't matter what my feelings are. Anyone who averages 2.96 yards per carry is not playing well, especially when other backs are rushing for 5 or 6 yards per carry. Averaging 2.96 yards per carry is BAD for a running back. It's not even average. It's below average.
Also, De'Veon Smith had three 40+ yard runs in 495 career attempts.
Hassan Haskins has six 40+ yard runs in 443 career attempts.
So to say they're both grinders doesn't do Haskins justice. He has better speed and the explosiveness to hurdle defenders repeatedly.
@Thunder 803
DeleteIt made sense when Barry Sanders didn't get the most carries his freshman year. It made sense when Biakabatuka shared carries. It makes sense when Blake Corum is hurt to not get the most carries as well. There is no contradiction and it makes perfect sense.
There is no flaw here, you're conflating different points.
That's not even touching on how Haskins can be better at some things and Corum better than others - which was a point made back in the Smith days. But you wanted to talk about YPC...
"Anyone who averages 2.96 yards per carry is not playing well"
Wrong. You keep insisting these tiny samples matter no matter how many times you are proven wrong about it. Cox wasn't playing well when he averaged 9ypc over 3 years. He was buried on the bench for a reason. Corum wasn't...for a reasoon.
Now...400+ carries we are on to something meaningful in sample size. Haskins has been a more productive player. 4.5 ypc vs 5.2 ypc. Do you think that having the same HC and OC for all 3 years and the best OL in the country might play a factor in that or is it pretty much irrelevant?
Do you expect that Haskins college production, superior speed (I'm not sure), and hurdling ability will translate to superior NFL performance?
Perhaps. I do think Haskins is a bit better but they are very very similar players IMO. Fringe NFL guys who lack top end speed. Tough and fun and a couple of my favorites. But very similar.
@ Lank 8:41 p.m.
Delete"Do you think that having the same HC and OC for all 3 years and the best OL in the country might play a factor in that or is it pretty much irrelevant?"
I dunno. Let's apply the same logic to Cox, Mr. Context Matters. I can't remember if the same HC/OC who coached him at Michigan followed him to UMass or not.
"Do you expect that Haskins college production, superior speed (I'm not sure), and hurdling ability will translate to superior NFL performance?"
Well, I do expect Haskins to carry the ball at least 1 time in the NFL, so that would surpass what Smith did in the NFL. So yes.
The Cox context is this. Barely touched the ball in 4 years at Michigan. Transferred and got a lot of carries he didn't do much with (and didn't help a low level team win with) and was replaced by a nobody who performed just as well the following year (by your YPC metric). Then in the NFL (coaching staff number 4) he also did nothing impressive. But you're so thirsty to find RB predictions that don't belong in the dumpster you've talked yourself into this proving you right. It didn't.
DeleteI'll be cheering for Haskins to be successful in the NFL. But having the same 40 time as Steve Watson probably isn't going to be helpful. Hopefully he gets lucky and finds a spot. A lesser player (Mike Cox) did! All it took was 4 other RBs getting hurt in one offseason.
LOL. It's funny to me that you pare down Smith's "context" to "Well, the poor guy didn't have the same HC/OC for his entire career and he had a bad OL" and then you make up a completely different narrative for Cox, who...didn't have the same HC/OC for his entire career and had a bad OL.
DeleteYou take an apples-to-apples comparison and turn it into an apples-to-hamburgers comparison.
I'll agree that Cox and Smith are apples and oranges.
DeleteSmith was given an opportunity and did well with it, despite what many fans say. Production reflects that. And he made it to the NFL for a bit.
Cox was given an opportunity and did nothing with it. Production reflects that. So he transferred. NFL liked his talent so he made it there for a bit despite lack of college production. Like Smith he didn't do much of anything. Unlike Smith he got a huge break in terms of opportunity when the Giants had guys falling left and right.
Cox might be more talented than Smith if you put a lot of value on speed - reasonable to do so. But he was a vastly inferior RB. That was obvious at Michigan. Two different staff said so.
Smith and Haskins are far better comparisons. They worked hard and made the most of the opportunities put before them. Made up for lack of speed with toughness, grit, grind. Will always appreciate these two for how they played.
Who would fans rather have:
ReplyDeletewalkon Tru Wilson or 3d Team All- American Hassan Haskins?
TrFR Dunlap or Blake Corum?
I think that answer is simple, but fans are often wrong
What about the coaches? Who would they trust running the ball?
A walk-on, a TrFR, or their OMVP?
Recent history suggests the walk-ons only play meaningful snaps by exception (Tru Wilson), and even then not until he was an upperclassmen. For TrFR, again it's by exception: ZC was our lead guy when we didn't have much else in the RB room; loads of promise, but nothing spectacular. The others mentioned above were very limited in use as a ball carrier. Credit to the coaches when they found a niche (Evans & Edwards), but no one is confusing them, young Higdon, young Haskins or Dunlap for the guys who have put time in the gym & filmroom, demonstrated the ability to protect the ball, block, and pick up EXTRA yards
The coaches - through their actions - tell us RBs do in fact matter
Which actions are those? The coaches have trusted freshman, most years, extensively and in critical situations. This year included. They have used walk-ons in various capacities but mop up duty to save primary backs from unnecessary workload is well within their capabilities. This year included.
DeleteFans are often wrong - something I agree with.
Some RBs are better than others - also something I agree with. Especially in doing specific things (pass blocking, interior running, etc.)
RBs (like most positions) get better with age/experience - also something I agree with.
None of that means that the RB position, one of 22 not counting special teams, should have an outsized allocation of scholarships.
None of that means that replacing a starter with a backup or third stringer affects wins and losses.
--------------------------
The irony here is something I brought up in the preseason. RBs will start to matter more if there are fewer of them. Because there are so many they are easy to replace.
They will also matter more if they are used more heavily in the offense.
They will also matter if you hit the very rare jackpot of talent and find a RB who truly makes a difference. Corum might be that - as I said in the preseason.
And yet...even in a year where literally everything falling in favor of RBs mattering falls into place...we lose arguably our best RB to injury and it's beating PSU and OSU, trouncing Maryland, and winning the B10 championship game with him out entirely or significantly limited.
By the way, I think the Tru Wilson is a walk-on thing is massively overblown. He was a Semper Fi All-American who had offers from the service academies. It's more like a Brian Griese-was-a-walk-on thing than Jordan Kovacs, the Glasgow brothers, etc.
DeleteMost of our productive walk-ons have scholarship offers elsewhere. That's not unusual.
DeleteRyan Glasgow was recruited heavily by Ohio State for a PWO spot. Kolesar had MAC offers. Kerridge would have had scholarship offers but for an injury. Carter Selzer had scholarship offers at lower levels. etc.
Hundreds of kids every year make decisions to walk on at big time programs instead of scholarships at small schools or lower divisions in various shapes and forms. Most kids I knew in this position took the money and the playing time route and who can fault them. Others can afford not to and have the gumption to climb that mountain. Good for them.
This type of player is part of a successful football program. There is nothing unusual or overblown about bringing in talented walk-ons who are hungry for a chance to be the next Griese, Kovacs, Vastardis, or Glasgow. Most won't be, most won't play at all, but plenty of them do play special teams, block, and carry the ball in low leverage situations. Hang that photo over your mantle or office forever...
Most scholarship backs are going to be better than most walk-ons. No argument there. But we can also recognize that Michigan is going to get some 3-star caliber kids as walk-ons pretty regularly.
Jordan Castleberry was another walk-on RB at Michigan, his scholarship offer was pulled from WVU, he walked-on, and then he transferred to play at Maryland before moving on to UT Martin where he ran for 5.1 ypc this year.
Players of this caliber (depth backups at RB) are readily available to Michigan. It's not unusual to have them.
There's nothing overblown about bringing in talented walk-ons. What's overblown is the hype of "Wow, this kid was an absolute nobody and then he did just fine at running back for Michigan!"
DeleteHe wasn't a nobody. He was chosen to play in a nationally televised All-American game as a senior, one of roughly the top 300 players in the country (100 for Army AA game, 100 for UA game, 100 for Semper Fi before it went kaput).
The point is that Wilson was a bona fide Division I recruit, not some run-of-the-mill Joe Schmoe who just walked in off the street and did okay as a backup running back.
Nobody said he was a nobody. But he was not rated as a top 300 player. He was rated as a top 2500 player by 247. The 62nd best player in Michigan.
DeleteBottomline is he's just a replacement level guy for Michigan and he could slot in and produce at a similar level to guys who are supposed to be much more talented and require scholarships.
Michigan has steady access who are better than the guy who walked off the street, because they are Michigan.
They can use scholarships on guys like him or not. Like at FB. It's up to them.
They can say "we have a depth problem so let's go out and sign Omary Samuels or Drake Johnson as insurance" or...they can not.
Extensively? Do you have your own definition of this, kinda like "receipts?"
ReplyDeleteI'll trust your research:
- what is the number of carries for each TrFR RB during the Harbaugh era?
- what is the number of carries for each walk-on RB during the Harbaugh era?
- how do they compare to the #1RB? #2RB?
RBs matter. The coaches actions (who gets the carries) demonstrate how much
You can do your own research (?). But here's some low hanging fruit comparing freshman and walk-ons to guys ahead of them:
Delete2021: FR 3rd string 5.1 ypc to the starter's 4.9 ypc
2019: FR 1st string 4.9 ypc to the other primary back's 5.1 ypc.
2018: WO 3rd string 5.9 ypc to primary back's 5.3 ypc
2017: FR 2nd string 7.0 ypc to primary back's 4.7 ypc
That's simplistic, not accounting for context, and ignoring very meaningful things like pass blocking (ZC was best on the team) or pass receiving (Evans and Edwards were/are excellent). Still, it indicates the obvious thing: freshman and walk-ons can and have done the job at Michigan.
You keep saying the coaches actions demonstrate how much RBs matter but not how. There's one RB on the field.* They rotate heavily which speaks to ease of replacement. People who supposedly "aren't ready" or "are not good" play, do well, and the team wins anyway.
They've halved the scholarships in the backfield from the Hoke era (8 or 9 in 2014 to 4 in 2021).
So yeah, we agree the coaches actions demonstrate how much RBs matter. Not all that much. Which is exactly right and reflects the modern NFL mentality to the position, as reflected in punter-level salaries, heavy rotation, and ease of replacement (see the 2021 Titans, 2018 Steelers).
So "easy" I don't even need a spreadsheet.
2016 not 2017. Evans freshman year. Like 2021 - a freshman RB was a nice complement to a more veteran thumping tackle breaking starter.
DeleteYPC? Is that all you have? How does YPC reflect coaches use of said RB? It doesn't, because sample size
DeleteThis is why I asked about Carries. I'm interested in how many carries walk-ons have had under Harbaugh; how many TrFR have had. I haven't looked it up, but think it's safe to guess they don't figure into the gameplan as ball carriers.
*Wilson is the exception for the many walk-ons Harbaugh has brought in, and only Charbonet & Evans got more than 5 carries per game out of the 1-3 RBs we signed in the last 7 recruiting classes
I think you know this, but as I've said in the past, you either don't comprehend data as well as pretending, or you purposely ignore the obvious to keep a debate going
Sad
Michigan's running backs in 2014:
Delete1. DeVeon Smith
2. Derrick Green
3. Justice Hayes
4. Drake Johnson
5. Ty Isaac*
6. Ross Douglas
7. Wyatt Shallman
So the 8 or 9 number is incorrect, and that doesn't even delve into the fact that a) Isaac was redshirting that year due to transfer, b) Ross Douglas was a position switcher who wound up on defense at Rutgers, and c) Wyatt Shallman was essentially a fullback who ended up on defense at Ohio.
But whatever, that's 7 guys and 1 of them couldn't play by NCAA rule.
@Thunder 528
DeleteYou are not counting FBs (Kerridge, Houma, and Hill). I said backfield. RB and FB. Houma and Shallman and later Mason played both.
I did not count Douglass. Move Hill to TE (he played at 3 positions) if you like and it's still 8 scholarships to the backfield compared to 4 now. With the same number of TEs.
So Michigan has 4 more scholarships now to put to DL, DB, WR, etc - places where they are more impactful.
That's a change in approach and a more modern view. Tells you something about the coaches.
@JE 517
DeleteNo YPC is not all I have. But playing time arguments fall on deaf ears here too. Like receiving stats. Like scholarships allocations.
Edwards is getting PT by choice. Corum got PT by choice.
The coaches, who clearly know what they are doing having just won AP coach of the year and Broyles award, made decisions based on who was doing the best in games AND in practice. They see many times more reps than we do. They aren't going to look at 17 carries and call it definitive. (Nor should fans since it's pretty obvious it doesn't work that way...but alas)
Those coaches choose to play freshman and walkons. Not because they have to. Because they want to. Because it's the best thing for the team. Because they are good. Because they are ready.
--------------------------------
You aren't presenting any data to comprehend or to refute what I wrote above. It seems like you are trying to sketch out an argument somewhere here that the bulk of carries go to non-freshman. Which doesn't prove your point or counter mine. The bulk of scholarships go to non-freshman too. So what? We've already covered that we agree on the benefit of experience. So what? None of it means RB matter and none of it shows that we can't use freshman. We can and we do.
There have been literally hundreds of carries going to freshman and walk-ons in the Harbaugh era. Those carries have been productive.
Make your case. Present your data. Or don't. Whatever.
Did you just counter the data with feelings?
Delete😂🤣😂
Emojis aren't data. But I see your white flag.
DeleteWell, then what data do you have? Certainly not Carries ... how else can you support the foolishness of comparing walk-ons and TrFR with program established RBs? YPC is all you offered. Either you don't understand the data, or you're misleading again
DeleteIn Ann Arbor, the identity is Harball. Gattis & JH trust their RBs with carries, but only certain RBs. All else are limited, with some strictly limited to garbage time and non-carrying roles. Why? Because moving the pile matters; breaking tackles matters; getting that precious 3d or 4th and short matters. RBs matter, and we see who they trust through carries
@JE
DeleteYes carries. And yards. and YPC. and receptions. and snaps. Freshman and walkons have had a substantial chunk of those under Harbaugh. He uses them. He trusts them. They are ready. They are good.
You seem to be struggling to follow the convo so I'll recap it for you.
1. You say we can't rely on FR
2. I say we can and we have.
3. Thunder counters with some YPC stats
4. I counter back with more YPC stats plus context by year to show that freshman production is common
....
You then make some unclear point and claim I'm not following data even though you provided none.
The depth charts are all the data you need. The season totals. The YPC. Pull whatever stats you want but pull SOMETHING if you're going to make an argument about data.
---------
Harbaugh has been successful on offense with all kinds of backs. I think Haskins and Deveon Smith before him are good and fun. I also think Chris Evans and Donovan Edwards are good and make plays. Vincent Smith was good for RR and Hoke. Ben Mason and Khalid Hill were good too. I also think guys like Higdon and Corum who can do a bit of everything are good. We always have good backs. Some are better than others but there are always plenty of good options. Not true at other positions.
The coaches play the RBs they think give them the best chance of winning because duh.
3rd and short matters for sure. Who are you arguing with? Literally nobody thinks it doesn't.
The point you don't get is that short yardage success is mostly on the OL. Ben Mason can do well in short yardage. Barry Sanders can do well in short yardage. You can put a TE back there or the jukiest RB of all time. Success is about the OL getting the push.
The point you REALLY don't get is that it's not just short yardage. Run game success is far less about the RB than you think it is. Team success even less. The NFL knows this. Maybe you know it deep down. But you want to argue...
Maybe next time you think you should write "too easy" think if that should be a question to yourself. Do better.
Only two TrFR RBs have had more than five carries per game under Jim Harbaugh
DeleteOnly one walk-on RB has gotten meaningful carries under Jim Harbaugh
Too easy
So even after making up your own criteria you still proved yourself wrong 3 times? And if you count RS FR it's 4. In year 7. LOL
DeleteAnd that's all ignoring Donovan Edwards - averaging over 100 yards a game to close the year and Blake Corum - beat out 2 older NFL caliber guys.
Keep digging.
Oh my. I've got to hear this one ... How did I prove myself wrong Lank? I mean, just because you cannot do it, you're pretending I did it myself?
DeleteHow many times did Harb & Gattis trust Edwards to carry the ball? Focus!
@JE
DeleteI'll remind you of what you wrote: "we'll need more than a RSFr and a TRFr "
Then you referenced Evans and Charbonnet to argue against yourself and Wilson as well.
Not referenced were:
Corum (COVID shortened year was enough for him to pass Charbonnet and send him off to transfer)
Edwards (>400 yards and 5 TDs on the year already, mostly in the last few games filling in for Corum) or
RS Freshman Haskins (>600 yards and 4 TDs)
That's just Harbaugh era. We can go back to Deveon Smith, Mike Hart, A-Train, the choices are endless!
Evans & ZC are the only two Harbaugh RBs to earn 5+ carries a game. ZC is the only TrFR to be the lead RB
DeleteCorum had 4 carries per game, less than half of HH last year. Context matters
Edwards had 30 carries, just ahead of JJ McCarthy. Context matters
There's a lot more said in between, but if making stuff up helps you, cool
Yeah context does matter - Corum had half as many carries as Haskins in 2020 but more than Chris Evans, who plays in the NFL, and Zach Charbonnet, who probably will too. That's what happens when you have 4 NFL caliber backs on one roster.
DeleteCorum was the best freshman back since Mike Hart. Better than ZC the year before? Yep, he sent ZC packing.
Even when I play by your made up rules (5 carries per game is the mark), you still take the L.
If you look at Corum over Evans and Charbonnet as a mistake by the coaches...how do you explain Corum's success as a sophomore?
DeleteYou were wrong. The coaches got it right!
Corum is good. Haskins is good. Charbonnet is good. Evans is good. There were no bad choices. And the team won 2 games.
Take away an NFL back and a thousand yard rusher and it doesn't matter. They won 12 games.
re: Harbaugh's "smash mouth style of football" from je93 8:37 PM
ReplyDeleteDo you mean Gattis' speed in space? Which you spent the last 2 years deriding?
It's so smash mouth that:
-most snaps are from shotgun
-zero fullbacks on scholarship
-backfield scholarships have been slashed in half since Hoke
-a read option QB subs in regularly to keep unblocked defenders guessing
-a 5'8 RB gets half the snaps
-55 passes to RBs
-16 handoffs to WRs
-critical snaps against OSU and Iowa given to a guy who "falls over grass" and "is not ready"
-the one RB over 220 lbs got 7 carries all year
-11 or 12 personnel on a plurality (majority?) of downs
The best OL in the country is mauling and mean and this team loves to run the ball but "manball" is just as nonsensical and meaningless as "speed in space".
The evolution away from the "manball" of 2015 (Jedd Fisch/Tim Drevno) continues to advance. We don't run I-form straight into the line with Houma and Green anymore. We don't give 4 scholarships to FBs anymore. This is a modern offense. The RBs can catch the ball. The QB can run the ball.
We don't run tempo and that's not a problem. It's manball speed in space basketball on grass blah blah blah. We run a modern offense even though we love to run the ball because we have a badass OL that is experienced. [The silver lining of 2020 is there if you want to see it.]
You don't have to line up in I formation to smash the ball. I don't expect you to know this
DeleteWe do use the Fullback position, as you have often credited Erik All this season
I did take issue with Speed In Space. Obviously, so did Harbaugh, because we are a run between the Tackles, punch you in the face offense (again) ... if a RB cannot do that, they don't get carries
In fact, play five Guards at Nebraska, and we keep our identity. We swap QBs, and we add to the Run, but keep our identity. Donovan Edwards goes in ... and we play to his talent, but not our identity. I love that the coaches are done with stubbornly forcing a square peg in a round hole, but this creative employment of assets proves RBs matter, he's not yet trusted with their identity, and Lank is wrong
Too easy
We use All at TE, WR, and FB. Please name another smashmouth team that uses the same guy at FB and WR. Save your breath. You can't. We don't have any FBs we have TEs who play at FB.
DeleteEdwards is getting plenty of snaps and hundreds of yards despite not being effective between the tackles runner(according to you). How do you explain that on a smash mouth between the tackles offense? Oh it's not our identity, even though we do it all the time. Got it... so we don't abide by our own identify. This makes perfect sense in JE-town.
"Creative employment of assets" oh hey look it's Greg from Succession on the message board trying to sound smart. Welcome Greg! Don't strain yourself because we already have a name for this - it's called "speed in space". You got it wrong 2 years ago, last year and now still. Looking forward to seeing how you get it wrong next year. 2022 looks to be a lot of fun.