Texas transfer wide receiver Jaime Ffrench, Jr. has committed to Michigan.
Ffrench is a 6'1", 185 lb. receiver who played in four games this past season, making 1 catch for 6 yards against Sam Houston State in a 55-0 blowout. He retains his redshirt and has four years of eligibility left.
Ffrench was a 4-star, the #9 wide receiver, and #44 overall in the class of 2025 when he was coming out of Jacksonville (FL) Mandarin. His transfer portal ranking is a 3-star and the #66 wide receiver, but how do you rank transfer players who basically haven't played at all in college?
Texas had some quality receivers this past season in Ryan Wingo, DeAndre Moore, and Parker Livingstone, so it makes sense why Ffrench wouldn't have played much. It is at least slightly concerning that he didn't have more of an impact, but outside of the Sam Houston State game, Texas didn't really have a lot of blowout, garbage-time opportunities in 2025.
Going back to Ffrench's senior film from the 2024 season, he shows some excellent change-of-direction skills. He has decent size at 6'1" and has adequate but not great long speed. If we're going by talent, Ffrench should be the #2 receiver at Michigan in 2026 behind Andrew Marsh. He probably won't create a ton of big plays with his speed, but I like his catch-and-run ability to be able to tack on an extra 10-15 yards after the catch using his shiftiness in open space.
Welcome young man!
ReplyDeleteWith OLeary & Semaj gone, all of our pLaYmAkErS from 2o24 have been flushed out. Good
Now we need Hill to catch up on recruiting to match Beck. Try harder Coach Hill!
Nice get to build up the talent in the WR room. Seems like a big upgrade, potentially for Michigan. Potential being the key word.
ReplyDeleteLike Thunder said it's hard to read the lack of production in his freshman year. That can be a read flag for a blue chipper, but I'm inclined to consider him at roughly the same potential that he was a year ago as a HS recruit (i.e., a 4 star). But to a college team he is more valuable (NIL$) as an addition given the development year under his belt. Thanks Texas!
Couple additional thoughts:
Wittingham/Beck appear to have a different mindset on the WR prototype than Moore/Bellomy/Hoke/Borges did. Between Ffrench and Moa (incoming?) and the strong push to retain Marsh it seems they value typical WR size (6'1 ish) with elite athleticism to the jumbo jumball threats that Moore/Bellomy seemed to emphasize (in words and actions). Now I maybe overstating the change. Maybe because Michigan already has a bunch of bigger bodies on the roster inherited from Moore in the '25 and '26 classes, or it maybe because they have WR/TE JJ Buchanan (6'3) coming as well. However, I choose to be an optimist and see that they understand that speed, skill, and athleticism matter more than size at the WR position.
On another note. I think this once again debunks the ongoing narrative that Michigan runs too much to recruit elite WR talent. Moa is top 50 composite recruit. Ffrench was a top 50 composite recruit. Travis Johson, like Andrew Marsh ranks as a top 120 composite recruit. JJ Buchanan is one of the top receiving threats in the portal.
Michigan is landing elite WR talent and they are doing it coming off a season where Michigan failed to hit 2,500 yards passing for the second consecutive year, top receiver finished 15th in the B10 in receiving yards, and just hired a coach who is notoriously run-first over 20 years at Utah.
Seems like it's not much of a hinderance either at the high school level or through the portal to run the ball a lot. Culture, development for the NFL, winning, prestige, and NIL$ are far more important to most receivers than putting up big volume stats.
Now that Michigan appears ready to spend real money on the WR position under a new regime they are attracting top flight talent to the WR position.
Finally, last thought, Buchanan is clearly not a pure WR nor a pure TE. We already had that before with Colston Loveland and Devin Funchess so it's not really anything new to have a WR/TE. (Not to mention many NFL examples) But it's kind of funny to see some folks get hung up on a hybrid player fitting into a box of this-not-that. It's a slash world! FB/TE, LB/Edge, S/CB, RB/WR, DE/DT all = LFG!
Oh Lank, you can't help but mislead
Delete"different mindset on the WR prototype"
Last year we added five guys to the room (because 2o24 lacked pLaYmAkErS). One was under 6' and one was over 6'3
Whitt is adding five, and none are outside the the 6'- 6'3 pRot0tYpE
only 2o24 - the year of pLaYmAkErS - had their "top two" WRs under the pRot0tYpE
*top two, LMFAO
"However, I choose to be an optimist"
You choose to lie. And I choose to point it out. Fun, huh?
"I think this once again debunks the ongoing narrative that Michigan runs too much to recruit elite WR talent"
psst ... it's a completely new regime Lank. No more 3o plus consecutive run plays. No more gimmicks who aren't trusted to pass
"Now that Michigan appears ready to spend real money on the WR position under a new regime"
I'm going to guess you have no idea how much MICHIGAN invested in WRs this year, or previous years ... just reeeaching
"But it's kind of funny to see some folks get hung up on a hybrid player fitting into a box of this-not-that"
Buchanan was announced (by the football program) as a WR. Can he play TE? Sure. I bet he lines up next to a Tackle, hand in the dirt at least five times next season. I also bet Bryce lines up at Receiver at least once ... but guess what Lank? Bryce is a QB! I don't mind explaining the game to you Lank
*by the way, still waiting on a response regarding Loveland: roster, draft profile, conference/all-American honors, Awards, team website ... anything that agrees with your assertion that lining up in the Slot made him a Receiver. You'll DODGE, again
https://www.instagram.com/p/DTbCufyicoN/?igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==
Exposed. AGAIN
That's a lot of insults packed into one message. Impressive!
DeleteI'll reciprocate your desire to argue but first a hats off:
"just reeeaching " <--- accurate
Now,
Moore added 5 WRs: 3 guys 6'3 or more (McCulley, Browder, Washington) all praised for their ability to win jump balls contested balls, 1 guy (Marsh) in the typical WR range (Marsh 6'1) who he called "the runt" but can do it all, and 1 sub 6' "slot" from the portal who barely played. Moore (and Bellomy) also talked very publicly about their emphasis on adding size to the room. Which is exactly what they did. That approached continued in 2026 with Zion Robinson 6'3, since decommitted, Travis Johnson 6'3, and a "runt" in 6'1 Jaylen Pile.
Meanwhile Whittingham is adding 1 slot WR/TE hybrid who is Lovelandesque 6'3. The end. The 2 guys he prioritized adding beside him are Marsh-like 6'1 (Pfrench, Moa) while prioritizing retaining Marsh. He has also added a depth slot option in 5'8 Alford.
So it does not appear that Whittingham is emphasizing size the way that Moore/Bellomy did and said. It doesn't mean much necessarily given roster composition being what it is, but the priorities appear at face to be very different when you notice the fact that not one guy Whittingham has brought in or fought hard to retain is 6'3 or over except for a guy Utah called a TE.
------------------------
DeleteNow to go back in time to some of the countless old debates one person wants to relitigate forever and ever...
Bryce plays QB. Playing 1 thing one time on a trick play, or even let's say 5 times over the entirety of the season, is not a position change or a "slash" situation. The point there is deception and surprise.
Now, if Bryce lines up at WR 100 times like Loveland did than we can call him a QB/WR like we can call Loveland a TE/WR. If Bryce spends an entire series at WR without lining up behind center once (like how Giles Jackson lined up at RB without lining up at WR once in that bowl game where he was RB3) then we can call him a QB/WR. Until then he's just a QB, even if he is used as a WR on a trick play or if he runs the ball sometimes like a RB.
A one-off is a one-off but consistent usage (e.g., Ben Mason being a TE/DT/FB/RB) or Khalid Hill being RB in the goal line package, or Charles Woodson lining up at WR most games makes for a slash situation. Strategy and trickery aren't the same thing.
Loveland played most of his snaps as a freshman split out wide or in the slot off the line. His blocking wasn't really there yet so they used what he thrived at. Sophomore year things got way more balanced between lining up off tackle and lining up at WR positions as Barner/Loveland were more interchangeable than in 2022 when we had Schoonmacher and Honigford. But junior year was more like freshman year, potentially impacted by injury and potentially because he was the best playmaker we had downfield, i.e., weakness in the WR room combined with Klein's ascension.
Results matter. You are how you used -- and a person who argued ad nauseum about Alex Orji not being a real QB should be the first to be screaming for a guy who is used like WR to be labelled a WR. But consistency is not a play in everyone's playbook.
A TE moving around betwen inline and in the slot sometime is normal and not an indicator of being a quasi-WR. A TE getting the ball on a reverse once or twice a season is a trick and not an indicator of being a quasi-WR. A TE being split out wide as one of 2 WR, with a FB and an in-line TE on the field at the same time as him on a regular basis is indicative of a slash.
Get the difference?
Loveland was used as a WR primarily and lined up like a WR primarily but also that's part of a TE's job description to run routes and catch balls and split off the line sometimes and he functioned in line frequently as well so he gets a slash. Orji never lined up as anything other than a QB, even though his skillset dictated limited use.
Loveland was, is, and always will be a TE. I'm not sure what strawman is arguing Loveland is not a TE but that imaginary character is incorrect. It's also true that in addition to being a TE at Michigan and drafted as a TE in the NFL he functioned as a WR primarily in the Michigan offense more often than he functioned as a TE in the Michigan offense over the course of his career. So he can have a slash (WR/TE) just like Jaishawn Barham can have a slash (Edge/LB) and Denard Robinson can have a slash (QB/RB) after his injury.
This is not actually complicated. It's pretty simple if you just acknowledge that yeah some people are more than one thing. Pretty easy. Pretty intuitive. Pretty obvious if you know football.
Charles Woodson at WR wasn't a gimmick it was getting your most dangerous guy into a role where he can be most effective. Ditto with using Loveland as a WR.
Look forward to seeing Buchanan on the field lining up at different spots next year. Inside, outside and (I hope) in-line, H-back, etc. Seems like he'd be most dangerous in a slash capacity to me, but we'll see.
Buchanan was announced by Utah as a TE but played mostly WR. I don't know who in the world would take issue with that, but they're probably not well adjusted.
---------
"psst ... it's a completely new regime Lank. No more 3o plus consecutive run plays. No more gimmicks who aren't trusted to pass"
DeleteMichigan passed the ball 42% of the time last year. Utah passed the ball 40% of the time (119th in the country).
Are you expected a big increase in volume of targets to WRs?
4 posts, because I got him
DeleteZERO insults, NONE. Learn to lose with dignity Lank. It's better for your credibility than the lies
You didn't disprove what I wrote about 2o25 v 26 WR rooms. Instead, the essays ramble to no end or purpose. I was right
"So it does not appear that Whittingham is emphasizing size the way that Moore/Bellomy did and said"
no one ever said ONLY size Lank, and you dodged every time I challenged you to prove it. The emphasis was on ADDING size. But not only size, production. Our WR room improved in every statistical category, by A LOT: Catches, Yards, TDs, you name it ... just as I predicted
Whittingham is carrying on this preference for production over your fantasy of pLaYmAkEr
"the fact that not one guy Whittingham has brought in or fought hard to retain is 6'3 or over except for a guy Utah called a TE"
This is not true. Whitt said his priorities were building his staff and RETAINING THE ROSTER; every receiver who ADDED size was retained by Whitt, including incoming recruits. Truth matters Lank
"The point there is deception and surprise"
Hmmm ... interesting that you went w/1-5. When I pointed out that Harbaugh didn't trust Orji as a passer, you insisted that his ONE attempt was not a gimmick. Checkmate Lank, you self owned again
"You are how you are used"
Hahaha, Orji = GIMMICK
#checkmate
"Blah, blah, blah"
All that, and you still DODGED. Nothing in the form of roster, draft profile, conference/all-American honors, Awards, team website that lists or refers to Loveland as anything but a TIGHT END
#whiteflagaccepted
"Giles Jackson"
I'm tryin not to laugh, but you're telling on yourself
Jackson rushed for ... TWO yards in the Citrus Bowl
He had 57yds RECEIVING ... the entire point of moving him around was getting his ... wait, what was it called? Oh yeah, speed in space
#throwbackL
"Buchanan was announced by Utah as a TE but played mostly WR"
Well at the University of MICHIGAN, he was announced as a Wide Receiver Lank. Facts matter
#jeDub
"Michigan passed the ball 42% of the time last year. Utah passed the ball 40% of the time (119th in the country)"
Huh? The "3o plus consecutive run plays & Orji being a gimmick happended in 2o23 & 24, not 2o25; what's your point?
Ah, misdirection = misleading
#exposed
"Utah WR stats from 2025 season. In order of receptions"
So McCulley & Marsh had more Yards ... not sure what you're trying to prove here
Four posts. Easily picked apart
#outsmarted
The argument doesn't make much sense that Whittingham isn't bringing in size or doesn't care about it. Why?
DeleteThere's already size in the 6'5" Jamar Browder and the 6'3" Travis Johnson, and he's bringing in 6'3" J.J. Buchanan, which Michigan has listed as a wide receiver. That's three receivers who are 6'3"+ when Michigan had none going into the 2025 season (except incoming commits).
@Thunder that was noted and acknowledged in the first post.
Delete"Now I maybe overstating the change. Maybe because Michigan already has a bunch of bigger bodies on the roster inherited from Moore in the '25 and '26 classes, or it maybe because they have WR/TE JJ Buchanan (6'3) coming as well"
Overall the size is similar when you look at outgoing vs incoming.
Browder and Johnson are on both teams, as are Goodwin, Stewart, and Bell. The changes are below:
McCulley 6'5 -> Buchanan 6'3 (WR/TE)
O'Leary 6'2 -> Johnson 6'3
F.Moore 6'1 -> Ffrench 6'1
Simpson 5'11 -> Pile 6'1
Morgan 5'10 -> Alford 5'8
Moa would add another body at 6'1.
So again, if you look at the aggregate room the change is negligible between '25 and '26. As expected since you don't want to turnover the entire room.
However, it's instructive that Utah did not use big receivers beyond guys listed at TE. And especially notable is that Whitt is EMPHASIZING a different sort of player to add to the roster (Ffrench, Moa).
I don't think you'll see Whittingham not recruit anybody 6'3 ever again, but I don't think you'll see him bring in 3 guys that big in one class ever again like Moore/Bellomy did. I think the '25 class of McCulley/Browder/Washington/Marsh class is the tallest you'll see for a loooong time.
He's emphasizing a different type of player because something is missing from the roster. It ain't size. But tradeoffs exist when you focus on one thing over others.
DeleteLanknows, iykyk, lankatoby, Stan, Anon, etc ... dude lives in an alternate reality. The multiple replies is evidence that not even he is convinced
Delete"I don't think you'll see Whittingham not recruit anybody 6'3 ever again, but I don't think you'll see him bring in 3 guys that big in one class"
This is silly. You know who else never recruited theee guys like that in one class? Carr. RR. Hoke. Harbaugh. Not even Moore & Bellamy, until our WR1 & WR2 were both under 6' and non-playmakers ... so they ADDED size (and playmaking, and production, and better Hands)
the shift from "they're different" to "okay, but from now on they'll be different" is hilarious. Big L
"Overall the size is similar when you look at outgoing vs incoming"
#whiteflagaccepted
Utah's 2025 #3 WR: 6'5", 210 lb. Tobias Merriweather
DeleteUtah's 2023 #1 WR: 6'5", 210 lb. Devaughn Vele
Utah's 2023 #3 WR: 6'4", 217 lb. Munir McClain
Utah's 2022 #1 WR: Vele
Utah's 2021 #2 WR: Vele
Utah's 2021 #3 WR: 6'3", 207 lb. Solomon Enis
Utah's 2020 #3 WR: Enis
Utah's 2018 #3 WR: 6'3", 207 lb. Samson Nacua
Utah's 2017 #2 WR: 6'3", 212 lb. Raelon Singleton
Utah's 2016 #1 WR: 6'5", 210 lb. Tim Patrick
Utah's 2016 #2 WR: Singleton
You're right. I don't think Kyle Whittingham will use any big receivers moving forward.
@Thunder
DeleteNobody said that or thinks that. Wittingham and Beck almost certainly will given Buchanan and the WRs they inherited, as noted before.
Your argument against the strawman isn't very compelling though.
Merriweather (a transfer from Cal via ND) had 8 catches, 3 of which came against Cal Poly. Those 8 was good for 10th on the team and 4th among WRs - 5th if you count Buchanan as a WR (which is mostly what he played). It was also less than Smith Snowden. So calling him WR3 isn't accurate.
Plus, Jason Beck wasn't at Utah before '25. So pointing out what Utah did 10 years ago isn't real relevant. At UNM in 2024, Beck's top WRs were even shorter than they were at Utah: 5'10, 5'11, 6'0, and 6'1.
At Michigan he should be able to find even better athletes who are even taller than that so I wouldn't expect the sub 6'1 dominated WR rooms Beck has used to continue. But it's clear that Beck hasn't seen it necessary to focus his energy on size. Instead he is picking out more prototypical pieces that look like the guys who tend to populate the top of the NFL's receiving production list averaging around 6'1.
Again, your argument isn't very convincing, either, that Michigan isn't trying to secure big receivers. They don't have to, because they already have big receivers. But if you're counting transfer portal guys, fully 50% of their transfer portal lands are "big" receivers since Buchanan is 6'3", 225 lbs.
DeleteMerriweather was #3 in yardage for Utah out of players listed as wide receivers.
Again...your argument doesn't hold up that Utah didn't use big receivers...
...because...again...if you insist Buchanan is a WR, then both the #2 WR (Buchanan) and #3 WR (Merriweather) are big.
Beck isn't picking out "more prototypical" receivers. This is nonsense. He got 1 average sized WR (Ffrench) and 1 big WR (Buchanan).
Got it. Jason Beck wasn't at Utah 10 years ago. So we're just going to assume he's the lone decision-maker for personnel, usurping the desires of the head coach who was at Utah since 2005.
oh look, he's "iYkYk" again
Delete@Thunder
DeleteYep that argument about the current roster having a lot of size is valid and acknowledged.
Buchanan is 6'3 but Ffrench is 6'1 and is Alford is 5'9. The other addition by the new staff (to the recruiting class) was Moa. So 25% of their adds were tall guys if you include the guy they previously called a TE and who will likely take snaps away from TEs.
Beck and Wittingham showed up and saw the WR room that was very big. They seemed to decide they needed to focus on ADDING athleticism and speed to the room. Their focus beyond retaining Marsh (not big) was to a)add Ffrench b) add Moa and c) add Buchanan. So Michigan lost 2 of their top 3 downfield targets (6'5 McCulley and 6'6 Klein) and the tallest guy they brought in to replace them was a 6'3 WR/TE.
It's also notable that, despite adding Alford, they didn't prioritize replacing any of the slot guys that will be gone (Morgan, Simpson, Charleston). They are getting their speed and athleticism closer in packages that are what I call prototypical size.
A prototypical WR is in the 5'11 to 6'2 range. You can have smaller or bigger but that's where most of the elite NFL WRs are going to be. That's where it seems this coaching staff maybe more focused -- guys who are all around WRs, not limited to jump ball or end around/screen specialists.
If my hypothesis is correct, I am pleased. It's a hypothesis based on how they acted. Not definitive proof. Moreover, I don't expect them to never recruit a anyone under 5'10 or over 6'3 again. But you don't have to build your room around specialists (aka limited players), and this staff seems to think along those lines at first blush. Their priorities appear to be different (i.e., oriented around athleticism more than size).
==================
Merriweather was not the #3 WR at Utah. Not in yardage, not in catches, not on the depth chart, not if you include Buchanan, not if you exclude buchanan. Maybe if he was healthy all year he would have been or maybe Buchanan took his role away. IDK but production and playing time wise he was not their #3.
WR1 was Davis by yards and catches and targets (tied with Bentley)
WR2 was WR/TE was Buchanan (played 10 snaps in line and Michigan is calling him a WR).
WR3 was Simmons in yards and catches and targets.
WR4 was Whittemore who had more catches and targets (17 to Merriweather's 15)
After that, Snowden (CB/S/WR/RB) also caught more balls than Merriweather and started 2 games on offense to Merriweather's zero. And Nate Johnson was used as a slot RB/WR type as well, getting more touches than Merriweather. Moreover, even if the season started that way (with Merriweather at #3) it didn't end that way. Merriweather had two catches after September. Meanwhile Creed Whittemore (5'11) had 10 of his 12 catches in November. So Merriweather is more liking Channing Goodwin -- who had a bigger role in September but faded.
Bottomline is that Beck/Whittingham didn't see a big need to put a big tall WR out there and force him the ball. They threw to their RBs, TEs, and used athletes like Nate Johnson and Smith Snowden creatively. They ran their QB a lot too. In other words, although they are run dominant offense they are also modern and multiple and want athletes out there more than jumpball specialists. So if that's true at Michgan, that's a departure from the kind of thinking that Borges/Hoke and Moore/Bellomy voiced and demonstrated.
We'll see what happens going forward but we can skip the strawman of don't "use any big receivers moving forward." Everyone agrees that won't stop. This is about what you focus on (at the expense of other things).
Okay, fine, I'll dive into the nitty-gritty with you. Utah's 2025 receiving yardage leaders:
Delete1. WR Ryan Davis, 725 yards
2. TE Dallen Bentley, 620 yards
3. TE J.J. Buchanan, 427 yards
4. WR Larry Simmons, 280 yards
5. RB Wayshawn Parker, 185 yards
6. WR TOBIAS MERRIWEATHER, 130 yards
Two of the players ahead of Merriweather are TEs, and 1 is a RB. Ergo, Tobias Merriweather was the #3 WR for Utah in 2025.
You're jumping through a lot of hoops not to include him. You're like, "Well, they listed J.J. Buchanan as a TE, but now at a different school after a transfer, Michigan is calling him a WR so whatever Utah said at the time doesn't matter."
Cool. Mike Sainristil wasn't a WR at Michigan, because he eventually was listed as a DB and I prefer to use that designation because it fits my argument.
Also, including Braydon Alford in the WR haul is silly. He was a 0-star recruit and falls in the category of being a walk-on or preferred walk-on from yesteryear. Why don't we also include Tomas O'Meara in the RB size discussion? Or Jake McCurry in the WR size discussion?
DeleteMike Sainristil was a WR at Michigan used as a WR at Michigan. He was also CB. Snowden was also both at Utah. Woodson, etc. These things aren't mutually exclusive. Guys can play more than one position. I'm sure you agree.
DeleteBuchanan was a WR/TE at Utah used as a WR/TE at Utah. He was listed as a TE last year on the roster but ended up playing WR (almost exclusively) so his same coaches are now calling him a WR at Michigan, and probably would have done the same at Utah. That's point 1.
Point 2 is: receptions, targets, and snaps are a bigger indicator of role than yards. Especially when you are talking low volume. Whittemore and Snowden caught at least 50% more passes than Merriweather.
I'm not jumping through hoops to say the guy who was 6th in receiving yardage of the team and probably something like 7th or 8th in terms of snaps among guys playing WR wasn't WR3.
This assertion is a big stretch all to argue with the approach that Beck/Wittingham are taking.
Braydon Alford is a WR on the football team who arrived via the portal. This is just a fact. He's pretty tangential to the conversation about what Beck/Wittingham are focused on adding to the room, but the countargument isn't just a little factually incorrect it is fully incorrect. There are 4 WRs brought in through the portal and the only tall one was previously listed as a TE. Actual fact. These are the 4 guys the new staff added to the room in the face of decommits from the class and roster attrition due to expired eligibility and portal departures. 5'9, 6'1, 6'1, and 6'3 flex WR/TE.
You have an excellent counter argument to my hypothesis -- they had sized covered on the current roster so didn't need to pursue more size. This is accurate - Browder, Johnson, Washington are all on the roster already. No need to add fake stats about 50% of the portal and WR3s who aren't.
*1997 MIchigan football's used Charles Woodson frequently on offense while listing him as a CB on the roster. He caught 11 balls (behind only Shaw and Streets, and several RBs and TEs) in 9 games. The next WR on the production list was Marcus Knight with 3 catches in 2 games. I don't know who played more snaps but I would say off memory that that team didn't use many 3-WR formations and that Woodson was WR3, not Knight on that team. He also, as you may know, was a CB.
I'll leave it there because this seems like relative quibbles and tangents to the larger point of discussion about how Beck/Wittingham will look to build their team and we'll just have to see over time how things shake out. Brady Hoke wasn't going to recruit a bunch spread run QBs but used Denard Robinson as his starter in 2011 - these things don't always shake out right away like they did with Mallet/Rodriguez. So we'll just have to wait and see.
For the record, my argument is that you will NOT see a repeat of the 2024 to 2025 offseason where Moore and Bellomy talked about size, emphasizing size, and the advantages of size without any mention whatsoever of speed, skill, athleticism, while bringing in 3 guys who were between 6'3 and 6'5 again. That does not mean they'll never recruit anyone over 6'2 again - they almost certainly will.
I see you're doubling/tripling/quadrupling down on the silly arguments. Why am I not surprised?
DeleteI stopped reading at “Braydon Alford”
DeleteBut it is funny: the same guy who insisted 2o24 WRs were playmakers is writing essays on the matter, certain that THIS TIME it’s different
Never change Lank!
Utah WR stats from 2025 season. In order of receptions
ReplyDelete1. 62 catches 675 yards (height 5'11)
2. 15 catches 280 yards (height 6'1)
3. 12 catches 92 yards (height 5'11)
Everyone else was either single digits in catches or listed as a RB, listed as a TE (Buchanan and Bentley who are both listed as 6'4), or a CB (our own Smith Snowden who is 5'10) was a WR/CB/S for the Utes.
Utah had a top 10 offense with the above.
-----------
Based on that roster, the results they had, and how the offseason has gone to date it does not seem like Whittingham/Beck have the same WR room priorities as Moore/Bellomy. Size is not their focus, though like anyone they would welcome it.