Fresno State transfer quarterback Mikey Keene has committed to Michigan. He has one season of eligibility remaining.
Keene is a 5'11", 200-pounder who spent two years at UCF before transferring to Fresno for the 2023-2024 seasons. When he was at UCF with Gus Malzahn as head coach, new Michigan offensive coordinator Chip Lindsey was his offensive coordinator for one season, a 2022 campaign that saw Keene complete 60/83 passes (72.3%) for 647 yards, 7.8 yards/attempt, 6 touchdowns, and 1 interception.
Hit the jump for more.
This past season, Keene went 6-6 as the starting quarterback for the Bulldogs (they finished 6-7 after a bowl loss without Keene), who faced a bit of adversity when head coach Jeff Tedford stepped down over the summer due to health issues. They opened the season with a 30-10 loss to Michigan in which Keene completed 22/36 passes for 235 yards, 1 touchdown, and 2 interceptions, including a pick-six to Will Johnson. Overall, though, Keene put up decent numbers in 2024 with 70.5% completions (277/393 passing), 2,892 yards passing, 18 touchdowns, and 11 interceptions.
For his career, Keene has completed 793/1170 passes (67.8%) for 7.0 yards/attempt, 65 touchdowns, and 28 interceptions. He's not much of a rushing threat, with just 2 rushing touchdowns in four years and a career average of -3.1 yards per attempt (including sacks).
As a high school player coming out of Chandler (AZ) Chandler in 2021, he was a 3-star, the #57 quarterback, and #819 overall. Along with UCF, he had offers from the likes of Coastal Carolina, Hawaii, Iowa State, Nevada, Tulane, and Yale. Keene never lost a game as a starter in high school and led Chandler to two straight state championships in Arizona in 2019 and 2020.
Diehard Michigan fans are probably more intimately familiar with Keene than they should be, because we spent all off-season looking forward to the season-opener for 2024 and wondering how the small but efficient QB for Fresno would play. He threw for 366 yards and 4 touchdowns against Purdue in 2023, so there was a healthy bit of respect for how he might perform on a big stage. And while Fresno State lost to Michigan by 20 points, I thought Keene acquitted himself fairly well. He just was playing with one hand tied behind his back against a talented Michigan defense.
As a thrower, Keene has a little bit of Russell Wilson moonball in him. Since he's a short quarterback, he has to try to find passing windows, and his lack of great arm strength requires him to be accurate and put air under the ball. The numbers show that he can be accurate and efficient. When given a throwing lane, he has a quick release and can put the ball on the money on short throws with a little bit of zip.
Obviously, Keene is not a runner; he can move around in the pocket a little bit and can get on the edge with some boots or sprint-outs, but he's not going to add anything in the run game - much like Davis Warren and Cade McNamara in recent years. He is also not someone who is going to be able to push the ball downfield on long-developing deep routes. If he hits deep throws, they're going to have to come on short drops where he can toss up 50/50 balls against press man coverage.
Overall, I'm a little disappointed but not surprised that Michigan took someone like Keene. It's a plus that he has experience with Chip Lindsey and his coaching points, but the athletic limitations put a cap on what the offense can do. It was always going to be a long shot that any noteworthy transfer QB would want to come to Michigan, considering the #1 overall recruit in the 2025 class will be waiting to take over at some point. If a quarterback has one or two years left to make an impact, does he want to spend that time looking over his shoulder at Bryce Underwood? In the cases of Miller Moss (USC to Louisville), Billy Edwards (Maryland to Wisconsin), and Brendon Lewis (Nevada to Memphis), they all chose to play for inferior programs rather than risk losing playing time to Underwood.
Michigan's quarterback room for 2025 now consists of Keene, Underwood, Davis Warren, Jadyn Davis, and Chase Herbstreit; both Jayden Denegal (San Diego State) and Alex Orji (destination TBD) have entered the transfer portal. I suspect Keene probably jumps to the top of the depth chart for the season opener, but by the end of the year, it would not be surprising at all to see Underwood take over the starting job.
Very disappointed & but not at all surprised. Moore needed better
ReplyDeleteIf he wins the job, my too early guess is that he loses it by the open week
Moss was the one needle-mover I heard about. Some of the dual threat guys were intriguing but, well, that doesn't seem to fit the direction of Moore and company. I find it hard to get too worked up about the difference between say Edwards and Keene. Edwards would have been preferred but they both feel like placeholders.
ReplyDeleteThe mgoblog guys talked about setting up the offense for Underwood and question the fit for Keene. I agree that the offense should be geared toward Underwood but I think that you want to bring him along pretty slowly (like they did with JJ and McNamara early in 2021). So if the offense is leaning into the short stuff a bit more (to fit Kenne) I don't see a conflict for Underwood, at least early in his career. You can expand the playbook later but you don't want to put too much on a freshman's plate.
As far as the run element goes -- you can put in an Underwood package (a la Orji and various others) if you want to do that for a change of base. But they are probably never going to run a ton with Underwood as there is perceived risk to him being exposed to injury that way. I'd be OK with doing away with the package entirely (or handing over the wildcat stuff to skill position guys like McCulley, Semaj, etc.) Moore and Lindsay don't have to continue this Harbaugh tradiiton.
Obviously Underwood is going to play but I think it's possible he could be used more or less like a conventional backup in 2025. I think Keene should be solid and likely a substantial upgrade to the Tuttle/Warren/Orji show. Hopefully if Underwood passes him (not a sure thing) it is because of merit, not need.
I look forward to seeing it play out.
I'd prefer that we just run the kid out there and take our lumps ... or not. Spoon feed him the offense that he can handle with a few elements that he can't ... yet, and let the chips fall where they may.
ReplyDeleteHis history indicates to me that he can get it done as a freshmen maybe more so than as an upper classman.
Would like to hear your thoughts on Daman Payne if you get a chance. I was told, "run thumper".
How much of an upgrade is this over Warren Davis?
ReplyDeleteSorry, meant Davis Warren
ReplyDeleteI think it's a pretty significant upgrade. We're talking about a guy with almost 1,200 pass attempts, compared to a guy who has just about a half season of starts under his belt. He's been under fire and performed adequately, whereas Warren was about as likely to bust as he was to make a decent throw. Again, I do think Warren improved throughout the season and will be better in 2025, but he won't be to Keene's level.
DeleteHopefully Underwood is even better.
Thanks Thunder!
DeleteI agree with Thunder's comment here.
DeleteI'll add that with a better supporting cast, you can see a guy like Keene elevate substantially - it worked for Rudock and you've seen other guys like Speight and McNamara fall off when not surrounded by the same level of supporting cast elsewhere.
But what's our supporting cast looking like? OL is anywhere from big question mark to concerning. No playmakers at WR. Small, noodle arm QB. I think we'd all welcome an experienced TE who can block
DeleteAfter the Haynes addition, our best or at least most promising unit is probably ... RB?
A valid question Jelllly our offense still looks pretty mediocre by Michigan standards let alone a national contender, but I think we can still confidently assert that the supporting cast for Keene will be better at Michigan than it was at Fresno State.
DeleteEven if it's just the guys they return. Marshall is a 4-star recruit who emerged into the rotation by the end of the season, McCulley was an all big ten HC WR a couple years ago, Klein is a proven starter, Morgan has made some big plays while at Michigan -- if those guys were transferring to Fresno, they would be pretty dang excited.
Keene has got to be pretty happy about the upgrade in talent he is about to experience. As for us, we already had a small noodle arm QB and a weak WR room in 2024. Things should be better if our new small noodle arm QB is throwing INTs half as often. It's a talent upgrade on our end as well (at QB).
It's all relative.
"better at Michigan than it was at Fresno State ... "
DeleteOof. Memories of the "loser thinking" remark last off-season
But again, it's like you sensed agreement and had to pivot: ...Marshall "emerging" is a gross exaggeration. He got seven garbage time carries in our biggest blowout victory, followed by ONE carry after our RB2 was injured & RB1 was run for +3o attempts in the final game
Your memories suck jelly. The quote you won't link to because you are desperate for someone to bet you about something you did (or didn't say) -- but no one cares? Loser thinking indeed! The "thinking" part is generous , but the other part is spot on. #still so thirsty
DeleteThanks for bringing up the 2024 OSU game -- Our starting RB going down didn't seem to matter against OSU yet again. No Edwards no problem - Mulling and Marshall take over, just like in 2022 when it was No Corum no problem.
-------------
Marshall didn't play early in the year so yeah "emerging" to get meaningful snaps against OSU and 8 carries in the last 2 games is a pretty big departure from early in the year. He's also expected to start in the bowl game, so there's that.
Meanwhile Justice Haynes had 10 carries in his last 2 games and won't play in the bowl game. What's the opposite of emerging?
Haynes is like Hall - a junior who has never been a feature back.
He's all of 1 class ahead of Marshall. That appears to be a big deal to Thunder but not to me. I would expect a heavy rotation next year and would not be remotely surprised if Marshall gets more carries than Haynes by the end of the season.
But that's all tangential because somebody just likes to argue.
"The supporting cast for Keene will be better at Michigan than it was at Fresno State."
You don't even disagree but here you are thirsty AF
Hold it up
HA, no disagreement ... just another rambling essay, desperate to argue with je93. White flag accepted
DeleteIs Marshall emerging yet?
DeleteHold it up jellllly
FWIW, Haynes had a higher rushing grade and a higher overall grade on PFF than Jam Miller. Not sure what was going on with the snaps/carries in the last couple games, but you never know if there was an injury or some other sort of issue holding him up.
DeleteYES ... Marshall emerged and was the OMVP as a result of proving that RBs do matter
DeleteInterestingly, the long line of edge rushers has continued at Michigan for much longer than the running back success. When it wasn't Taco Charlton, it was Chase Winovich. And when it wasn't Winovich, it was Uche. And when Uche moved on, it was Paye. Then Hutchinson and Ojabo. Then Morris and Harrell and Stewart. And when Stewart opted out, it was Derrick Moore getting 2 sacks in the bowl game.
DeleteThe argument about "running backs don't matter" has often cited Donovan Edwards replacing Blake Corum at the end of 2022, so surely a new argument titled "edge rushers don't matter" will center around Derrick Moore replacing Josaiah Stewart at the end of 2024.
When it comes to defensive ends, people talk about the development of those players through S&C/coaching and the expertise of Lou Esposito, Greg Mattison, Mike Elston, etc. and a knack for scouting the right players and deploying them properly.
It's weird that the same logic isn't applied to running back...
@Thunder
DeleteBad logic.
It's not weird because an individual defensive end is almost never credited with the entirety of a phase of the defense. RBs are often credited with run game results as if it was all about them.
People don't say stuff like "we have no chance of beating OSU" when a defensive end gets hurt. You said it about Corum (paraphrased, quoted below). You didn't not say it about Morris -- but they had the same situation, almost exactly, back in 2022, so it's a pretty good test case.
Remember when Mike Morris was hurt before the 2022 OSU game and no one knew if he would return or not or in what capacity he might contribute (kinda like Blake Corum?). It was discussed, but not nearly as much, and certainly not with the same gravity or consternation. For most folks it was an afterthought. Typical fan wouldn't remember morris (basically) didn't play the way they remember that Blake (basically) didn't play in that one either. Not NEARLY the same level of mattering in the court of public opinion.
Mike Morris was the big ten DL of the year that year and a mid round draft pick. A big time player... People saw it as an issue but one that could more or less be papered over with a change in rotation. Jenkins would get more time, and McGregor, and maybe Okie on the back end of the rotation. Not great, but not a deal breaker, either. next man up. If someone said otherwise (we can't win without Morris), I didn't hear it.
Same situation (or very very close) but there was A LOT of concern about Corum and not NEARLY as much about Morris.
Let's check the Ohio State preview:
On offense you left this comment:
"
ThunderNovember 25, 2022 at 7:52 PM
If Corum isn't close to being healthy, Michigan will not win this game. He's the focal point of the offense, and nobody else has really even shown flashes of being able to be The Man when crunch time comes."
https://touchthebanner.blogspot.com/2022/11/preview-michigan-offense-vs-ohio-state.html
Meanwhile on defense there was mention of the relationship between Morris and the results in the week prior, but not the same gloomy prediction:
https://touchthebanner.blogspot.com/2022/11/preview-michigan-defense-vs-ohio-state.html
" Last week was a "season worst" effort when they gave up 148 rushing yards to Illinois on 4.35 yards per carry. Of course, that was without defensive end Mike Morris, one of Michigan's best run defenders, who suffered an ankle injury two weeks ago. "
You pointed out the correlation between Morris' injury and results in the run game.
I'll remind you of what happened with Michigan missing it's best RB and it's best DE in that game (mostly):
Morris went for only 1 series in the OSU game (like Corum, he tried) and OSU ran the ball pretty successfully (29 for 143 including sacks). Michigan struggled to stop OSU's run without Morris. Michigan did not struggle to run without Corum.
In your postgame review of OSU you mentioned the absence of Corum but said nothing about Morris.
The defense had it's roughest stretch of the season after Morris was hurt and the TCU debacle was one where Morris played very poorly, with limited number of snaps, and likely compromised and generally considered to be "Clearly not himself." by mgoblog (quote) and most others.
If we are blaming the TCU loss on someone's injury I would put Morris way ahead of Corum. And Schoonmaker ahead of Corum too.
================================
So that's one example right there of a DL going down and it being tied very directly to the outcomes he is generally credited with being a big factor in.
Where is the same for RB?
@Thunder Part 2
DeleteAdd DE/EDGE to the list of positions where I can almost immediately point to an example of correlating a Michigan player injury to a directly related Michigan football outcome in a way that cannot be done at RB.
The same logic doesn't apply to RB because the same examples don't exist.
I'll concede that you can find examples of guy B replacing guy A and it being OK. But can you find examples of where RB B replaced RB A and it was not OK? I just did it for Morris.
Sometimes guys get replaced adequately (plugging in Jones for Zinter in 2023) because the backups are good. Not EVERY injury is a PROBLEM. But some are, at positions that matter - it shows up.
Moreover, in the case of Edwards you and jellly have gone to great pains to talk about all the ways Edwards WASN'T the kind of guy who could run inside or handle the full duties of the RB position -- before and after he did exactly that in 2022. So if Edwards was really as bad as you criticized him for being -- why didn't we see any hint of impact across those 3 critical games in 2022? Because Edwards is so awesome? You don't think that! You've made that abundantly clear.
I have asked before for examples were RB A goes down, RB B comes in, and things fall to pieces and the responses have been exceedingly weak.
TCU is the best you got when clearly the defense was the big issue that game? Illinois was RB A going down and RB C coming in (Edwards was out too) and while yes the rushing game suffered, the offense as a whole was more productive and scored more in the second half (without Corum) than in the first half (with Corum). So even when it matters (in the run game, replacing a superstud with a walk-on mattered) it didn't matter much in the overall outcome (just pass more).
PS
Moore didn't replace Stewart. It's not weird that Moore played well against Bama (he starts even when Stewart is around) and is also considered an NFL caliber player, already, and also thrived against Bama in the Rose Bowl - so your better argument would be with Guy replacing Stewart last week. But that's tangential...
PPS
I'm tempted to hold off on arguing how much more impactful veteran DE/EDGEs are than freshman/sophomore DE/EDGEs but I'll restrain myself. Development/experience also matter more at some positions than others... OL>CB for example.
Finally, Marshall is a 3rd stringer with hardly any experience. Arguably the 4th stringer for most of the year. A freshman, barely tested.
DeleteAre there any examples of losing a starter AND his backup at DE/Edge... and then just plugging in a barely used backup and seeing equivalent results? I'm guessing it happened at some point but I can't think of it.
--------------------------------
"Haynes had a higher rushing grade and a higher overall grade on PFF than Jam Miller"
I think Haynes will do well at Michigan. I don't really care if he RB 1, 1a, 1b, or 2. He's probably better than Ben Hall. And if Marshall goes down he will probably be a "legitimate star". He maybe even if Marshall doesn't.
But none of that matters very much if guys like Marshall or even Stokes, Dunlap, Hall, and the incoming freshman, can produce 90% or more of what Haynes would produce if given his same role. I believe that to be true, HOWEVER I do keep hearing he's an excellent pass blocker so maybe that's a point of differentiation for him. I could see that mattering because a lot of younger RBs struggle in this department. Maybe he'll matter! (because of blocking).
LMAO, what, did you take a lunch break in between essays? Get a life already 😂
Delete@ Lank 3:38 p.m.
DeleteYes, I can find an example. You just don't like it.
When Corum was out against TCU, there's no way Kalel Mullings is getting the ball on the goal line. It would have been Corum - a proven short yardage runner - and he would have scored, because he always did. But they had to go with a gimmick of handing the ball off to a converted LB who was lined up as an offset fullback, there was a fumble, and Michigan scored 0 points on the drive. They then lost by 6 points.
This has been discussed before. You don't like it, so you dismiss it. Kalel Mullings had 0 career carries before Corum got hurt, and he was forced into action because of the injury to a RB.
These things are directly correlated.
Could OSU's rushing success possibly be because they were a good running team? They averaged 5.37 yards/carry for the season, which was the highest of any team Michigan faced in 2022. They were ranked #11 in yards per carry.
Michigan also struggled to stop the run against TCU, the next highest team at #23. Mike Morris was available and played 39 snaps, his third-highest total of the season.
Michigan also struggled to stop the run against PSU, the next highest team at #38. Mike Morris was available.
The highest ranked rush offense (by yards per carry) that Michigan stopped that year was the mighty UConn Huskies, who were ranked #42.
As for Michigan without Blake Corum against TCU...the Wolverines averaged 4.65 yards/carry. Other teams who averaged more yards per attempt:
Georgia 5.77
Kansas State 5.27
Iowa State 5.13
Baylor 5.04
Texas Tech 5.00
Kansas 4.97
Kansas State 4.66
I know you don't like this argument, so it will be dismissed. Facts are facts, though.
@Thunder
DeleteAgain - it's a terrible argument.
First of all, Mullings fumbled while playing FB. Corum played FB zero times in his career. Mullings did it many times (in a 2 back set).
Secondly - fumbles happen. That's not on Corum. Corum himself fumbled a few times in big games.
You can blame this on Corum like you can blame the defensive struggles on Corum. It's just as logical to blame Donovan Edwards fumbling more as a senior than any year, because Blake Corum wasn't around? Nonsense!
"and he would have scored, because he always did. "
He did not. You must have forgotten about how folks were crying about red-zone success DURING CORUMS CAREER.
Mullings fumbled because he fumbled. Shit happens. He was a good short yardage RB, perhaps better than Corum and he was good at it in 2022 having scored already twice from short yardage the game before TCU and another time in the TCU game.
You can say "Corum would not have fumbled on the Mullings fumble" and I can say "Corum would have fumbled on the Mullings TD". Counterfactual.
It's LAUGHABLE that the guy you praise so heavily in 2024 is the same guy you are blaming for losing the TCU game where....I'll repeat....we scored 40+ points.
It's such a bad argument. It's preposterous.
Facts are facts -- the Michigan offense THRIVED against TCU. Without Corum. Just as they did against OSU and Purdue.
That is the correlation. No Corum No Problem. Edwards took on a bigger workload and he starred.
The problem was 50 points.....but I'm guessing you're going to go ahead and blame 500 yards given up and 2 pick sixes thrown on Corum.
When I see a pile of BS I'm going to call it a pile of BS.
----------------------------------
"Could OSU's rushing success possibly be because they were a good running team?"
Yes! Absolutely.
But they also struggled against TCU when Morris was trying to play through an injury (which you ignore). And they also struggled against Illinois -- which YOU POINTED OUT was a season worst performance.
THAT is correlation. A fumble happening when a guy isn't there is not.
Mullings only had the ball because The Don never developed into a short yardage Back
DeleteMaybe Lank will dismiss this issue in February
#resolution
#rentfree
#whiteflag
Yes. Of course. I understand that you won't accept the argument, because you don't like it.
DeleteMichigan struggled against Illinois' rushing offense? Chase Brown ran for 990 yards and 7 touchdowns this season for the Bengals.
Michigan struggled against TCU's rushing offense? Kendre Miller ran for 148 yards and 1 touchdown this season for the Saints.
Michigan struggled against OSU's rushing offense? Ohio State was the #11 rushing offense in yards per carry that season (5.37), and even with Treveyon Henderson out, they had Chip Trayanum and his career 5.1 yards/carry. Not an elite running back, but also not a chump, and running behind a solid offensive line.
Michigan shut down Indiana's rushing offense? Interesting. Their top running back, Shaun Shivers, is now the running backs coach at Chaminade Madonna.
It's okay, Lank. We'll pretend that Michigan losing its #5 all-time rusher and #1 all-time touchdown scorer and one of the top graded RBs in PFF history wasn't a factor in anything:
https://x.com/PFF_College/status/1762509646550429713?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1762509646550429713%7Ctwgr%5E1c70b107ed999f0d811242e16bb2016d94ba4c2e%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwolverineswire.usatoday.com%2F2024%2F02%2F27%2Fpff-blake-corum-has-highest-career-grade-of-all-draft-eligible-rbs%2F
I think it's hilarious that you're pointing out that Michigan gave up 50 points, as if that all had to do with Morris's absence. McCarthy threw two pick-sixes - which you do mention - but the problem wasn't the defense if Michigan scored 45 points and the defense only gave up 37. And it was even less the defense if Michigan scored from the 1-yard line, which would have put Michigan at like 52 points compared to TCU's 37.
If you truly think the offense hummed along just fine despite giving up 3 turnovers (including 2 pick-sixes), when they had given up 0 or 1 in all thirteen games prior to that, then there's nothing else I can say but that you're wrong.
Ugh, you went to stats ... here come Lank's feelings
Delete#page2
#resolution
@Thunder
DeleteI accept that argument about quality of opposing run offense because it is a good argument. OSU, TCU, and Illinois are good defenses and good running teams. A fall off by Michigan could be explained by level of competition independent of personnel. This goes for the rush defense and the rush offense.
Another way of making your point -- Correlation does not mean causation.
But Correlation is there for the defensive struggles. It's not there for the offensive struggles.
We did NOT see a fall off in the offense against OSU and TCU even though those were strong defenses. We did not see a fall off in the offense from the 1st half to the 2nd half of Illinois. We DID see a fall off in the defense against Illinois, OSU, and TCU. Maybe that's not due to Morris being gone and maybe it is, but Michigan gave up 20 points once all year prior to his injury (against Maryland) and it gave up over 20 in every game after he was hurt.
It's funny that you will hang the TCU loss on one fumble, or two INTs and assert that Corum's health could have eliminated them but not make the same assertion for Morris the FIVE touchdowns the offense scored.
Michigan put the game within 3 points early in the fourth quarter. No more turnovers after that but they did immediately give up a 76 yard TD on a busted coverage by QJohnson (getting his first real responsibility of the season with Moten not playing).
Scientific proof that the defense fell off because of Morris' injury? No. But it's facts and it's evidence that counters your argument.
As does a more simple fact of the scoreboard reading what it reads.
================================
"It's okay, Lank. We'll pretend that Michigan losing its #5 all-time rusher and #1 all-time touchdown scorer and one of the top graded RBs in PFF history wasn't a factor in anything:"
There is no pretending. The results speak for themselves.
The pretending comes in the counterfactual that we would not have fumbled if Corum had played instead of Mullings.
Corum fumbled in the playoff game the previous year (against Georgia) and Corum fumbled in his last (healthy) carry (against Illinois). Your argument doesn't pass the sniff test.
"If you truly think the offense hummed along just fine despite giving up 3 turnovers (including 2 pick-sixes), when they had given up 0 or 1 in all thirteen games prior to that, then there's nothing else I can say but that you're wrong."
It's funny that in Morris' case you're willing to blame the opposition for the quality of their rushing attack and discount his impact as an individual. But somehow the INTs thrown by JJ against a top 25 defense, and the fumble by Mullings against a top 25 defense, are all because Corum wasn't there.
Blaming a 51-45 loss on any one or two plays is delusional, but asserting those plays wouldn't have happened because of one guy (who doesn't even play the position of the primary culprit) is flat out laughable.
There's nothing else I can say but that you are inconsistent...and wrong.
Corum was great! Losing him didn't matter!
DeleteThere's no conflict there. Because he's a RB.
@ Lank 1:12 p.m.
DeleteIf you really read my comments as actually believing that defensive ends don't matter, then you misinterpreted. It was a tongue-in-cheek comment.
Every position matters in its own way, and having a good player is better than having a not-good player.
You have previously mentioned that Blake Corum was a difference-maker at running back, and now I guess you're walking back that comment.
To quote a guy named Lank, "Not even you agree with you."
"We did NOT see a fall off in the offense against OSU and TCU even though those were strong defenses. We did not see a fall off in the offense from the 1st half to the 2nd half of Illinois"
DeleteExcept that we did, but you continue to dodge
http://touchthebanner.blogspot.com/2024/12/justice-haynes-wolverine.html#google_vignette
#liesDebunked
#stats
And never forget this: Edwards behind the same OL against the same Defense and on the same drive, gets stuffed because he misses his cut ... he wanted another try, but Harbaugh wasted a time out because who gets that goalline carry matters
https://youtu.be/0OfkS-xw_9c?si=oB4LvB7CQ140TcK_
Blake the Great obviously scored ... this is definitely an example for NOT questioning the coaches! Hmmm ... I wonder who gets that TCU goalline carry?
Comparing Mike Morris - a good player - to Blake Corum - a program legend is misleading. Only a liar would bother to try
#noNameDefense
#blakethegreat
Blake Corum fumbling twice in a year has NOTHING to do with why Mullings got that TCU goalline carry ... his injury does. Why didn't Edwards get that carry?
#RBsmatter
The quantity of misinterpretions make it safe to assume ignorance. The misinterpretions are just lies
#resolution
#page2
@Thunder
DeleteI understand that you think Edge matters. The point is while you countered the demonstrated correlation at that EDGE position you failed to address the LACK of correlation at the RB.
"Every position matters in its own way, and having a good player is better than having a not-good player."
All lives matter. All positions matter.
Factual correct but it just means you're obtuse and missing the point.
If RB matters "in it's own way" we are in agreement - if the WAY is less than every other position on offense (except FB!). If the WAY is never noticable to a team outcome -- we are in agreement.
@jelly
DeleteThese dumb arguments are getting boring.
You're questioning goalline carries for Mullings? The guy you praise (over Edwards) over and over? Now here you are wondering why they used the bigger more physical back in a goalline situation? Where he was successful time and time again, including earlier in this game? Mullings proved himself to be a good option on short yardage over his career. Edwards faced a heavy workload (since unlike Corum the coaches didn't split his workload as heavily) so they used RB2 (elevated post Corum) in the role that suited his strength.
Not complicated. But you feign ignorance, just to argue.
Care to provide any evidence that Blake Corum was better than Mullings in short yardage over their careers?
Of course you won't.
Corum fumbled. Edwards fumbled. It happens. But rarely. Mullings also fumbled very rarely in his career. Just like Corum. Corum didn't just fumble when he was hurt (against Illinois) he also fumbled against Georgia and PSU and MSU. Corum, like Edwards and Mullings, fumbled infrequently in his career. When Corum fumbled, he tended to do it in big time games.
https://www.maizenbrew.com/football/2021/11/1/22757814/michigan-football-jim-harbaugh-michigan-state-mccarthy-corum-fumble
So yeah the assertion that Blake would have done something different than what Mullings did in these goalline situations is BS. It's a fantasy. You don't know and you don't have any evidence to back it up. It's just feelings.
======================
"Comparing Mike Morris - a good player - to Blake Corum - a program legend is misleading"
Mike Morris was a 5th round draft pick and Blake Corum was a 3rd round pick.
I see you still dont understand what a comparison is but even by your own definition (you can't compare two things that aren't identical) -- these were two were similarly valued as players, as demonstrated by their draft position and 2022 season accolades. Corum is obviously more famous because fame goes along with the RB role (which is why I make the hyperbolic assertion I make about how little it matters relative to the attention and credit it gets).
===========================
"Blake Corum fumbling twice in a year has NOTHING to do with why Mullings got that TCU goalline carry"
This is just funny. Again you are arguing with your own fantasies. Nobody said Corum got benched for fumbling LOL. Corum was great.
Losing him didn't matter.
Corum didn't play because he was hurt. He's a great player. But Michigan can replace him without being affected. There's no contradiction there. It's just that some things matter a lot and some things don't matter much.
I didn't, in fact, fail to address the "lack of correlation at the RB." I've addressed it 100 times by now. You just don't like it.
DeleteBlake Corum. TCU. Fumble. Lost points. Mediocre seasons with mediocre RBs. This should be ringing a bell by now.
I was at the gym a couple days ago and saw an ESPN discussion where the talking heads, which included Jeff Saturday, were talking about running backs in the NFL. I pulled out my phone and snapped a picture because of our discussion. Since I can't post a picture here, I'll just write the blurb from the bottom of the screen as he was talking:
"NFL for sure undervalued RBs too soon. People can see a difference in what RBs can do."
There are lots of running backs around the league and in college football who are having a huge impact on their teams, including Saquon Barkley, Derrick Henry, Bijan Robinson, Jahmyr Gibbs, Kyren Williams, Bucky Irving, etc. The Eagles went from 12-5 without Saquon Barkley to 14-3 with him. The Lions went from 9-8 without Jahmyr Gibbs to 12-5 with him. Derrick Henry is the first non-Lamar Jackson player to lead the Ravens in rushing since like 2018. Why couldn't Justice Hill, Gus Edwards, J.K. Dobbins, etc. have done that?
Why do 3 of the 4 teams in the CFP have outstanding running backs? Why not 0 or 1 team? Hmmm...
@thunder, Remember when Derek Henry didn't matter either? Lank actually put that in writing
Delete#resolution
#page2
You made a NY resolution but put it off until February ... these off-season posts must be too tempting? Or ... maybe YOU are dumb? I don't know the answer to that ... Definitely bored
The only question re 2o22 Mullings goalline carry v TCU is, would Corum have run it if he were healthy ... a season's worth of evidence says: YES
And, YES, Harball prefers "more physical back" ... but we settled that: http://touchthebanner.blogspot.com/2024/11/preview-michigan-vs-ohio-state.html
Who said Corum was "the better short yardage Back?" I haven't, or you would have quoted it ... but if we're sticking with 2o22, who did Harbaugh & staff give the bulk of those carries to, Corum or Mullings (hint, Mullings was at LB). Why?
#trustthecoaches
LMAO, holy spin ... how many fumbles did Corum have per carry in 2o22? Mullings? GTFO with that ... also, the sparty fumble was on McCarthy. You know this, but tried to sneak in another lie: https://www.mlive.com/wolverines/2021/11/jim-harbaugh-remains-confident-in-michigan-qb-jj-mccarthy-after-fumbles.html
#exposed
"these were two were similarly valued as players" Were they? all-Conference DL with one Player of the Game is good ... but a consensus All-American, top10 Heisman (x2), B1G Athlete of the Year, player of the week 16 times and Team Captain is LEGEND
Nice try, but another FAIL
#historylesson
"fame goes along with the RB role"
#whiteflag
NOW THAT IVE ADDRESSED YOUR DISTRACTIONS, let's get back to what you keep dodging:
- why did ten of Harbaugh's RB recruits never work out? Did they have to play behind a different OL? Against different defenses? DODGE!
- What happened to our run game when Blake Corum went out against Illinois? His THREE replacements rushed for LESS THAN HALF the yards, LESS THEN HALF YPC and ZERO TDs ... Did they run against a different Defense? Did they run behind a different OL? DODGE!
- Why did Marshall run for 4x more yards than Hall? Why did he have more than 2x the YPC? Why did he earn MVP? Did he run against a different Defense? Did he run behind a different OL? DODGE!
- Why did Jim Harbaugh waste a timeout after Don failed on the goalline (not unlike TCU), and then give the ball to Corum? Did it matter?
Why? Did he sub out the OL too? Was there a different opposing team on that next play? DODGE!
#isolatedvariable
#RBsmatter
maybe it's time for a username change ... nah, that would be dumb
#resolution
#page2
@Thunder
DeleteYou haven't addressed it. Sorry. Corum didn't fumble against TCU. He fumbled against Illinois, PSU, MSU, and Georgia.
Its as valid as saying Michigan would have lost the OSU game in 2022 with Courm instead of Edwards. Made up shit! A fantasy.
Congrats on the talking heads agreeing with you. I'll stick with the GMs that agree with me. Like the defending super bowl champs:
https://overthecap.com/salary-cap/kansas-city-chiefs
"Saquon Barkley""
If you watched the game yesterday they pointed out how the Eagles OL led the league (a full yard over average) in blocking yardage before contact. That's a great team with an elite QB and some very strong receivers.
EPA/Play
2024 offensive rankings = 6
2023 offensive rankings = 7
Did Barkley make a difference? Go ahead and ask the talking heads they are experts you trust!
I'll check the facts.
You keep ascribing things to RBs that RBs should NOT get credit for. That's on you! The eagles made a whole bunch of different moves. I'll give all their credit to Trevor Keegan.
Eagles went from 12-5 without Trevor Keegan to 14-3 with him.
Disproved your argument with your own logic. You just don't like it.
==========================
Maybe it's really important to you that instead of the Ravens giving 282 carries to Edwards and Hill in 2023 (split 198/84) they gave 325 carries to Henry instead in 2024. They went 12-5 that way. They went 13-4 the previous way. They won their wildcard game in 2024 28-14 and in 2023 they won it 34-10.
One might ask themselves if "Derrick Henry is the first non-Lamar Jackson player to lead the Ravens in rushing since like 2018." is something that one should not consider to be very important to team success.
NAH!!!!!!
===========================
"Why do 3 of the 4 teams in the CFP have outstanding running backs"
Because they are good teams with outstanding players at every position.
Why did 3 of the 4 teams in the last NFL final 4 NOT have outstanding running backs?
@ Lank 2:05 p.m.
DeleteAgain...you don't like the argument, so you ignore it. It's been addressed 101 times now.
"Why did 3 of the 4 teams in the last NFL final NOT have outstanding running backs?"
The premise isn't even accurate.
49ers: Christian McCaffrey - star running back, obviously
Lions: Jahmyr Gibbs/David Mongomery: Gibbs was a Pro Bowl runner in his rookie year and a bona fide star, and both ran for 945+ yards while splitting time
Chiefs: probably best QB in the NFL right now along with elite play caller
Ravens: MVP QB
So 2 of the 4 had outstanding running backs, and the others had elite QB play.
You're treating this as an either/or discussion, and it's not. Nobody's saying you either have a very good RB or your team sucks. Teams have always been able to be successful if they have elite QB play, just like most of the Patriots teams, even when the RBs were Kevin Faulk, Corey Dillon, etc.
"I'll stick with the GMs that agree with me"
Delete*except Sean Magee
#RBsmatter
*also, another DODGE!
#resolution
#page2
@Thunder
DeleteThe argument isn't ignored. That's not remotely true. It is acknowledged, contradicted (with evidence) and summarily dismissed. See my last post as an example.
Your argument for TCU is an assertion, a counterfactual, a hypothetical. Might even call it a fantasy. We don't know if the team would have done better or worse with Corum healthy against TCU (just like OSU).
What you have is an opinion that you are asserting as fact. And then you falsely claim that I'm ignoring it.
What we do know is that the 22 UM offense never showed any ill effects post-injury relative to pre-injury. This is true in a micro before/after comparison (Illinois first half vs second half scoring) and it is true in the macro before/after comparison (offensive scoring against TCU, Purdue, OSU vs comparable opponents like PSU, Iowa, Maryland).
Were there turnovers and failures after Corum went down? Yes - just as there were before he went down. You failed the sniff test.
The argument doesn't hold up. It's not ignored. It's addressed.
-------------------------------------
@Thunder 2
DeleteNFL argument: You are bringing up elite QBs in a conversation about RBs. I don't know of your opinion on Goff and Purdy, but those guys produced pretty elite QB results in 2023 too.
Perhaps a strong QB and elite OC and elite OL can make average starting RBs (like Montgomery showed he was in Chicago) and his backup look like elite players?
So when there was consternation expressed, for example, when David Montgomery went down my immediate reaction was LOL IT DON'T MATTER. And guess what, suddenly people are talking about how IMPORTANT the backup RB replacing him.
It's all entirely predictable. These guys are so important that when they disappear there is no negative impact! And then the backup is just THAT GOOD. (it turns out, after the fact).
Same thing at Michigan. Same thing in Detroit. Same thing everywhere. Jordan Marshall is the latest example. I can't wait for the cycle to repeat for him.
The CYCLE OF RBS MATTER
Step 0: A productive RB is deemed Indispensable to team success
Step 1: Conjecture that Indispensable RB is a difference-maker so using Unproven RB instead would hurt team
Step 2: Indispensable RB becomes unavailable and unproven RB steps into bigger role.
Step 3: Unproven RB thrives in bigger role.
Step 4: Uproven RB becomes Indispensable RB. Return to Step 0.
It happened with Corum (with the excuse that he hulked up before 2022 to become an every down back to replace Haskins), it happened with Edwards (the excuse was he was a boom/bust back), it happened with Marshall.
--------------------------
The point of the 3/4 argument for the NFL is that you can invest next to nothing in your RB spot and produce offensive results that are excellent. Meanwhile a team like the Eagles can invest massively in the RB position (with most things else being held constant) in one offseason and show no clear positive change relative to the year before.
It's not a matter of either/or at all. It's that everytime anybody credits a RB with making a difference it's almost always disproven almost immediately. Lose an impact guy or gain an impact guy - offensive outcomes don't seem to change very much.
If a big RB addition DOES coincide with a big offensive improvement then there is typically some other change that can just as easily explain it (like a new OG, or a return from injury of a TE, or a new coordinator, or....). But the RB will always get the credit if it does. The other stuff will get ignored.
RBs are overrated. Period.
I know I'm out of step with most fans on this. I KNOW RBs get a ton of glory, accolades, and fame.
What they don't get -- NFL GMs buying in and paying them as if they are difference-makers.
Here's the bone I'll throw you though. They can be! Barry Sanders was. I kind of think Corum was (even though it didn't show up in 2022). I kind of think Barkley might be in the NFL (even though it didn't show up in 2024 regular season) and definitely think he was in college at PSU. Those exceptions are rare. It can happen though! RBs can matter! They just rarely do...
We're not going to miss Mullings or Edwards anymore than we missed Haskins or Corum (or Charbonnet or Evans or....). Marshall will step in. Haynes will step in. If those guys both go down then Hall or Parker or whoever else will step in.
Might have been a different story if Michigan was throwing a lot to Edwards, but they didn't. Can't miss what you don't use.
If the Lions lost Montgomery -- it don't matter. (because they have Gibbs?)
DeleteIf the Lions lost Gibbs - it don't matter. (because they have Montgomery?)
If the Lions lost Gibbs and Montgomery???????
Well, we know what happened when Michigan lost one of their NFL-caliber RBs against OSU (they won) and then they lsot both of their top 2 NFL-caliber RBs heading into a matchup against Alabama and they won again. The 3rd guy was deemed the MVP in a bigtime upset win.
Maybe it (losing your star RBs) mattered? But it doesn't look like it did.
@ Lank 6:01 p.m.
Delete"We don't know if the team would have done better or worse with Corum healthy against TCU (just like OSU)."
This right here defines the issue with the argument and why it's so frustrating. You ask for proof/evidence that the team suffered a drop-off without a good running back (like Corum), and when evidence is prevented of a performance without Corum, you respond with, "Well, there's no possible way to know for sure if the team would have been better or worse with Corum."
You're the comedic lawyer in the courtroom who just objects to everything while everyone in the courtroom rolls their eyes.
@ Lank 6:11 p.m.
DeleteWait...so you're saying the Lions weren't affected by losing Montgomery because they have...a Pro Bowl 1st round pick as the other option at running back? Yeah, that's a great argument. The Packers also didn't miss Brett Favre because they had Aaron Rodgers waiting in the wings, so I guess quarterbacks don't matter, either.
Still dodging!
Delete#resolution
#page2
@Thunder
DeleteYes - losing a starting RB doesn't matter. It don't matter for the 2024 Lions or 2022 Wolverines. Still waiting for evidence when it did.
"when evidence is prevented of a performance without Corum, you respond with, "Well, there's no possible way to know for sure if the team would have been better or worse with Corum.""
You don't have evidence Thunder! You're making an assertion that Michigan wouldn't have lost if it hadn't fumbled and it wouldn't have fumbled with Corum. But Michigan has fumbled with Corum! The aggregate results in rushing and the offense as a whole show no downgrade after Corum got hurt. That is evidence!
You're denying the facts and making up a fantasy. It's not evidence, it's your theory which is based on tautology (RBs matter therefore RBs matter). And it's disproved by very direct examples (Corum fumbling vs Illinois, Georgia, PSU, and MSU). It's contradicted by the fact that Mullings fumbled less often than Corum over his career.
Bring the evidence and I'll change my mind. You haven't! Everytime you've tried it fails a basic sniff test. You credit RBs for the things they shouldn't get credit for (like fumble elimination). You credit Barkley for making an impact (yet the PHI offense is no more effective with him than it was without him). You said Michigan had no chance of beating Ohio State without Corum in 2022 and they whooped em.
It's this simple -- You're wrong.
"Obviously the backup is ALSO so awesome -- that's why RB1 isn't missed"
DeleteDidn't we already go through this with Donovan Edwards?
You doubted him before the end of 2022 and but when he stepped into RB1 he became awesome. A glowing review:
https://touch-the-banner.com/2023-season-countdown-13-donovan-edwards/
But then he went back to RB2 and he became not nearly so awesome. A mixed bag of good and bad:
https://touch-the-banner.com/2024-season-countdown-5-donovan-edwards/
5 star recruit / 1st rounder -- I see a parallel!
Wouldn't at all be surprised if Gibbs "struggles" with splitting carries next season LOL
@ Lank 11:56 a.m.
DeleteHmmm...tautology is saying the same thing repeatedly, hoping that it makes sense just by saying it again...
...which sounds exactly like when you say "running backs don't matter" in different ways.
Project much?
Show me evidence where running backs matter!
Okay, here's some evidence.
I don't like that evidence! You can't use it!
Round and round we go.
Blake Corum was really good.
Then he got hurt, and somebody who had never played running back before had to play.
That player fumbled on a crucial goal-line play about 10 carries into his new position.
You say running backs don't matter. There's a case where it did.
You will dismiss it because Blake Corum fumbled before.
Quarterbacks also don't matter, because both J.J. McCarthy and Davis Warren threw interceptions!
Cornerbacks also don't matter, because both Will Johnson and Brandon Watson gave up touchdowns!
Coaches don't matter, because Lloyd Carr and Rich Rodriguez and Brady Hoke and Jim Harbaugh all lost to Ohio State!
You can use circular reasoning if you prefer.
DeleteYou don't have evidence, you have counterfactual speculation. It's that simple.
It's not about like or don't like - you don't have any evidence!
Corum and Edwards were both healthy in all of 2023 and guess what -- Mullings played anyway! Given the struggles against Illinois, maybe they would have seen a need for a better 3rd option at RB anyway, and maybe said 3rd option would have gotten the ball in the post season (as happened in 2021, 2023, and 2024).
All you have is SPECULATION. A theory. Not evidence. You THINK if Corum is healthy there would be a different outcome. You don't KNOW - and you can't prove it. It's just your opinion.
Which is not evidence.
If it was I could sit here and speculate that Tyler Morris would have had 45+catches, 600+ yards, and a bundle of TDs in 2024....if only JJ McCarthy had returned to college.
That's not evidence! It's a theory.
-----------------------------------------
Blake Corum was really good. He was replaced and the offense showed no effects. Somebody fumbled when Blake Corum was healthy, somebody fumbled when Blake Corum wasn't.
Blake Corum does not prevent fumbles. You ignore this.
Mullings was playing FB when he fumbled! You ignore this.
Now you are contradicting yourself saying Mullings never played RB when previously you argued with me how HAD played it in high school and how that was relevant and how I was underrating him because of that. You were right on that! Now you are wrong.
McCarthy threw 11 ints in 713 pass attempts. ~1 every 70 attempts
Warren threw 10 ints in 223 pass attempts ~1 every 20 attempts
QB matter, that's evidence.
I could go on but what's the point. You're just going to keep being wrong about this, like you were in 2022.
PS
I have repeatedly agreed that it's possible other positions can be replaced capably if the backup is good. But you don't think Donovan Edwards is good! You think he can't break tackles, lacks vision, etc. etc. That's why you keep deflecting the one fumble of Mullings career (?) in 2022. It dodges the point that you thought losing Corum would matter and it didn't (vs OSU, Purdue, as well as TCU). You were wrong!
And EVERYTIME you try to find a case where it DID matter, you fail to provide compelling evidence. Sometimes it's overtly incorrect (as with Barkley).
Your honor, seeing as the defense has no evidence to support the defendant The prosecution rests its case!
2022:
DeleteBlake Corum: 1 fumble in 247 carries
Kalel Mullings: 1 fumble in 14 carries
Losing Corum did matter. The team was undefeated with him. Their only loss was without him, and they lost by less than 1 touchdown (6 points) when a non-running back was forced to play running back and fumbled on the 1-yard line.
This is evidence. You don't like it, because it doesn't suit your narrative.
You've made a lot of pro-De'Veon Smith and a lot of pro-Vincent Smith arguments in your day, but...running backs don't matter, so why not play Ty Isaac or Michael Shaw or Brandon Minor or Michael Cox in front of them? Because running backs matter!
If running backs didn't matter, you wouldn't argue for someone over someone else.
But you do.
Even you don't agree with you.
Put another way -- It kind of says it all if this is the best "evidence" you can come up with and you keep bringing it up over and over again.
DeleteMichigan's offense did better without Corum than it did with, against stiffer competition, to close 2022. This is a fact, not speculation. The results show it.
If RBs matter as much as you think - you should have SOME better example. Some evidence of where it DID matter. Not a THEORY that it could have mattered, but actual evidence of a change in outcomes, where losing a RB had a clear and direct correlation with the change. At some point in history this would have happen right?
I think it did. In the example of an exception I've often cited -- Barry Sanders. In 1993 he injured his knee on the Thanksgiving game. The offense suffered as a result. The rushing game production dropped by 40 yards and YPC dropped by half a yard. The Lions couldn't make up the difference passing more, although they tried. The passing game increased yardage slightly but YPA went down without Barry. The offense as a whole gained fewer yards per game and scored fewer points. Finally, but least connected to Barry since defense and special teams also exist, they went 3-3 in games where he was injured and 6-3 in games where he wasn't.
So, pretty much every way you slice it, Barry Sanders injury correlated with outcomes -- from team outcomes, to offensive outcomes, to the thing he is most directly tied to (rushing the ball), all of it got worse when Sanders got hurt.
Barry Sanders mattered. Evidence for RBs mattering is there when they matter. You don't have to make stuff up. Pretending speculation is evidence doesn't help your case.
---------------------------------
Because again, yes, sometimes valuable impactful people get replaced by other valuable impactful people in valuable impactful roles and there's no evident sign of change in outcomes (like Zinter). But if it happens EVERY time, then the valuable impactful role probably isn't so valuable or impactful. If the impact is invisible even when the valuable impactful person is replaced by a not very valuable or impactful person -- then maybe the role isn't so impactful afterall.
So, again, to abundantly clear -- this is not a case of ignoring evidence it is a case of a lack of compelling evidence.
Michigan did better without Corum? They were 1-1 without Corum (W vs. Purdue, L vs. TCU). They ran for 4.65 yards per carry against the #82 rushing defense in the country in TCU and for 5.92 yards per carry against the #115 rushing defense in the country in Purdue. Meanwhile, their best statistical performance came against Penn State - with Corum - and the #7 rushing defense in the country.
DeleteBlake Corum's rushing grade for 2022: 96.2
Donovan Edwards: 86.9
C.J. Stokes: 73.4
Isaiah Gash: 78.1
Kalel Mullings: 69.7
It's almost like the better running backs get better grades than the worse running backs, and coincidentally, the grades (mostly) match up with the depth chart...
...and if running backs don't matter, then they would all have the same grade or their grades would be randomly mixed up.
They're not. Because running backs matter.
Uh oh, back to back posts ... Lank fails to convince even himself!
DeleteMICHIGAN pass game did better without Corum, because they didn't have a physical, Harball back to do what he did ... JJ, the WRs and Loveland all came on, just as soon as Corum went out. There, that's the context to your 'fact' that the offense improved
AND YOU KEEP DODGING:
je93 on 11 Jan at 8:23AM
- why did ten of Harbaugh's RB recruits never work out? Did they have to play behind a different OL? Against different defenses? DODGE!
- What happened to our run game when Blake Corum went out against Illinois? His THREE replacements rushed for LESS THAN HALF the yards, LESS THEN HALF YPC and ZERO TDs ... Did they run against a different Defense? Did they run behind a different OL? DODGE!
- Why did Marshall run for 4x more yards than Hall? Why did he have more than 2x the YPC? Why did he earn MVP? Did he run against a different Defense? Did he run behind a different OL? DODGE!
- Why did Jim Harbaugh waste a timeout after Don failed on the goalline (not unlike TCU), and then give the ball to Corum? Did it matter?
Why? Did he sub out the OL too? Was there a different opposing team on that next play? DODGE!
#isolatedvariable
#RBsmatter
Lank has time for username changes but not for staying on topic
#resolution
#page2
Yes Thunder - the OFFENSE did better without Corum. You're also ignoring OSU because you want to be obtuse.
Delete"...and if running backs don't matter, then they would all have the same grade or their grades would be randomly mixed up."
Nope.
Don't matter does not equal all the same. Covered before.
Individual grades don't reflect team outcomes nor are grades proportional to impacts (see: QB). It tells you nothing about positional value.
You are wrong here.
Here are the results:
3 games after Corum's injury: 45, 43, 45 points (against better competition)
3 games before Corum's injury: 34, 52, and 29 points (against lesser competition)
The first half vs second half split against Illinois also shows more without corum (10 points) than with Corum (7 points).
You want to talk about team outcomes instead of offensive outcomes OK -- the best team Michigan beat with Corum was PSU (#6 FEI) while without Corum they beat OSU (#2 FEI). They lost a barn burner to TCU (#8) after losing several key players to injury (beyond Corum) but didn't see any other top 20 teams during the entire season. Michigan went 2-1 against top 10 teams and Corum was the most productive RB in zero of those games.
Against PSU and OSU Edwards out rushed Corum. Corum did not play at all against TCU and the offense put up 488 yards and 5 TDs. No problemo. The offense was excellent in all 3 games. With corum without him, made no difference.
Corum was really good (as his grade shows!) but losing him didn't matter (as the results show.) Because running backs don't matter (like you think they do).
Again -- you were already proven wrong here. You said Michigan had no shot against OSU without Corum. You were wrong, but you so refuse to be wrong about this that you continue to INSIST that losing Corum was hugely impactful. You already made the claim and got disproved but on it goes.
Oh well!
Yeah the other guys "coming on" when Corum went out kind of proves my point jelllllllly. Another self own.
Delete- why did ten of Harbaugh's RB recruits never work out? Dumb question. Some guys don't work out. Some OL don't work out. Some LB don't work out. I'm sure you think you have some point here but you don't. Hold it up.
- What happened to our run game when Blake Corum went out against Illinois? Michigan outrushed Washington in 2024 and so what? What happened to our OFFENSE against Illinois? It scored more points in the half without Corum than the half with. Points, not rushing yards, are what wins games. Hold it up.
- Why did Marshall run for 4x more yards than Hall? Why did he have more than 2x the YPC? Why did he earn MVP?
Because he did? Another dumb question. Is this where you try to argue RBs are not all the same again? zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz #logicfail
- Why did Jim Harbaugh waste a timeout after Don failed on the goalline (not unlike TCU), and then give the ball to Corum? Did it matter?
Because he thought Corum was a better option on that play. On other plays he thought Edwards was better. Dumb question.
Did it matter? Probably not! Probably could have put any of 10 guys out there and they would have done the job but he went with his best RB which is duh and derrrrr and derp who cares.
Your logic doesn't work. You aren't built for this
You keep arguing with your dumb fantasies. Keep dreaming!
HOLD IT UP
"Losing Corum did matter. The team was undefeated with him. Their only loss was without him, and they lost by less than 1 touchdown (6 points) when a non-running back was forced to play running back and fumbled on the 1-yard line."
DeleteMullings is a RB but he was playing FB when he fumbled. Intentionally obtuse.
Michigan lost to TCU (giving up 51 points) and almost lost to Illinois (with the worst offensive performance of the year, albeit better in the 2nd half than the first).
You want to make a connection between injuries and those two? They were both good teams and good defenses where Schoonmaker was missing. He was hurt and missed all of Illinois (and 4-8 Nebraska) and he went out early against TCU forcing Hibner and Honigford onto the field.
Michigan missed Schoonmaker. They didn't miss Corum.
This is evidence. You don't like it, because it doesn't suit your narrative.
-----------------------------------
Now IF Corum had played in that TCU game he obviously would not have been able to replicate what Edwards did. Corum rushed for 5.9 YPC on the year while Edwards rushed for 7.1 YPC so Michigan would have rushed for 1.2 YPC fewer for each running play (You taught me Thunder that this kind of analysis is valid, so even though I think it's BS, I'm trying to apply Thunder-logic to Thunder).
This is evidence. You don't like it, because it doesn't suit your narrative.
------------------------------------------------------------------
My arguments for the RBs was to trust the caches (Rodriguez, Hoke, Harbaugh) on their RB decisions. Your argument that anything would change is what I argued against. I don't think offensive outcomes would have been substantially different if it went your way but I still think you are wrong for suggesting it all those times. I never once said Michigan would end up losing games if it took your bad advice to change RBs every 2 seconds.
This is evidence. You don't like it, because it doesn't suit your narrative.
@ Lank2Thunder 3:33 p.m.
Delete*sigh* and *facepalm*
I'm not the one constantly being dismissive and saying "you have no evidence!" when evidence is clearly presented.
You clearly have no answer for the question "why do coaches have a depth chart if the running back doesn't matter?" There's no reason to play De'veon Smith over Ty Isaac or Derrick Green or Drake Johnson unless the coaches have a preference, so the running backs must matter. If the running backs don't matter, Michigan should probably just tell Justice Haynes and Blake Corum and Donovan Edwards and Jordan Marshall to transfer so they can play a lightly recruited young guy who doesn't cost much in NIL.
Dang, I got him to change his username again ... and the best he has is another "probably"
Delete#dodge
#jeDub
#resolution
#page3now
Dang, I got him to change his username again ... and the best he has is another "probably"
Delete#dodge
#jeDub
#resolution
#page3now
In Jelllllly fantasy. LOL
DeleteNeeds more hashtags tho IMO.
Must have forgot the rules of that fantasy.... every accusation
Delete@Thunder
Delete"You clearly have no answer for the question "why do coaches have a depth chart if the running back doesn't matter?""
I have an answer. I've given it multiple times. Your logic is flawed.
Relevant and Identical are two different things.
Not all RBs are the same. I never said they were.
I can use a blue pen or a black pen or a red pen to sign a check -- they are different. But it hardly ever matters which I use. Pens are useful, they play a role, but if you lose one you just replace it. Pens matter? Well, not really. Nobody cares. You can spend more on a pen or less on pen because you like how it makes you feel but at the end of the day the results (ink on paper) is all the same and it doesn't matter what pen you use.
You're asking why I choose a pen if they are all the same, but the answer is because I have to choose 1, not 2, and I don't really care which I use.
Coaches can have a preference. They HAVE to choose a starter. Doesn't mean it matters.
I personally like blue pens I guess, but it doesn't matter to anyone else. No one cares about ink color.
They are different. But it doesn't matter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If the running backs don't matter, Michigan should probably just tell Justice Haynes and Blake Corum and Donovan Edwards and Jordan Marshall to transfer so they can play a lightly recruited young guy who doesn't cost much in NI"
Now you are catching on!
There would be no significant change in outcomes if Michigan just used replacement-level guys at RB. I know you agree since Michigan used a guy who had no redeeming qualities other than being fast and being able to catch (i.e., can't break tackles, lacks vision, etc) and then you predicted that guy would be 1000 yard rusher, TWICE.
Think of RB like you think of FB and TE and Kicker -- it's not a very important position relative to others. All kickers are not identical, but very few of them are difference makers (Zvada is one of those exceptional exceptions that I think does matter, but most do not.)
The NIL money should go to more important positions like QB, OL, and WR. That's the "moneyball" play. That's what NFL GMs do.
The value of the franchise tag by position show you what NFL GMs think. RB is more important than Kickers and Punters....but no other position.
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-franchise-tag-values-heres-how-much-it-will-cost-teams-to-use-the-franchise-tag-based-on-position/
-Lank
You can also look at the NFL salaries in many different ways and get the same idea.
DeleteChristian McCaffrey is the highest paid RB in the NFL and the 104th highest paid player in the NFL.
The Lions had 2 of the top 18 paid RBs in the NFL. Yet they lost in the playoffs to a team using below average costs at the RB position (and whose leading rusher is their QB). Meanwhile on the AFC side, the likely super bowl winner will not have a RB ranked in the top 40 by pay. They are using guys making near the minimum per year. And it's working!
Eagles are an exception amongst remaining NFL teams. They invested HEAVILY in RB, paying Barkley near top dollar. But they don't have any gains to show for it (relative to 2023 offensive performance).
The other 3 teams said, essentially what I said -- RB doesn't matter very much. And they are winning with that strategy because they invested more in positions that do and less in positions that don't.
-Lank
Yeah, anon has a point ... from Kingston Davis to Cole Cabana ... they could have beat SC, ohio & bama. We could ride Christian Turner to a national championship!
Delete#anotherL
#tooeasy
#lankLoses
Where's the L for Lank?
DeleteIn your dreams only.
#fantasy
Hold it up.
Still dodging!
Delete#resolution
#page3
Still fantasizing about Lank!
Delete#obsessed
#trolllllllllllllllllling jelllllllllllllllllly
I have a harsh truth for you guys:
DeleteYou're both obsessed with each other. This is like the Spider-Man meme where all the different Spider-Man characters are pointing at each other.
@Lank
DeleteChristian Turner ... Cole Cabana ... Kingston Davis
#noResponseJustDodge
@Thunder
I wouldn't say obsessed. Lank insists this isn't worth his time. I'm simply in the habit of letting him prove himself wrong
#notevenLankbelievesLank
3 of the top 4 NFL teams (or at least the 4 finalists in 2023) had excellent punters:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.reddit.com/r/bengals/comments/18rywnh/thepuntrunts_punter_epa_in_2023/
So based on this (admittedly weak criteria, but it was used to make a case for CFB running backs) it seems that having an excellent RB is no more relevant than having an excellent punter. But most folks (right or wrong) tend to not care about or consider punters to matter all that much, certainly not like RBs.