UM Football Recruiting - by WM Wolverine

[Rocky Bleier]

I sure hope Greg Mattison figures out the coaching shit soon. He's been at it long enough. Or, perhaps, the reason his defense got run over was because he had undersized, undertalented players on the d-line. No, I'm sure it's because Mattison just hasn't figured out the coaching shit. He must have forgotten what he knew at Florida. Or maybe Urban was coaching the defense. I also believe that the 1997 Michigan defense was all about Jim Hermann. There wasn't much talent there, and Greg Mattison had nothing to do with developing any of them.

[hack]

I agree that it's hard to imagine Hoke looking bad whilst Nussmeier looks good.

[SeattleLionsFan]

Who said Mattison didn't have success previously? But they only get players for 4 maybe 5 years. Is it too much to expect that they would have a good Dline after 3 years?

Great coaches make players better. Quickly.

[hack]

And Mattison has a track record of doing this. So you can't rule out his culpability but you can't just pin it on him. Possible that something else is wrong. But we'll know in a year. Mattison has a decent stable of four-star DLs to work with and he'll have a nice number of upperclassmen in the back seven. It should be a pretty good defense, though probably short of elite.

[lineygoblue]

I still think one of the biggest problems with the entire team is that AS a team, they are too soft. Not enough "tough" guys. Too many nice guys.

Just IMO.

[Rocky Bleier]

Who said Mattison didn't have success previously? But they only get players for 4 maybe 5 years. Is it too much to expect that they would have a good Dline after 3 years?

Great coaches make players better. Quickly.

Tell me the name of the players from last year's d-line that you believe should have been great. Mattison's defense in year number one was greatly aided by the presence of Mike Martin. No one on last year's team came close to Mike Martin. You can't make chicken salad out of chicken shit.

[Da Geezer]

absolutely correct Liney. Do you think it has anything to do with the rule of no helmut-helmut contact during practice?

I know that no one agrees with me, but I'd rather have a Narduzi-style defense that attacks. I think Seattle just showed the advantage of having that kind of attitude.

[SeattleLionsFan]

I don't know about tough v nice. I do think the team doesn't have the strength of will or personality to impose itself on the other team.

There was a real leadership gap last year. I think Lewan may have been more polarizing than we thought.

[Da Geezer]

Interesting: actual letter of intent for 2010-11 (only one I could find):

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/CNBC/Sections/News_And_Analysis/__Story_Inserts/graphics/__PDF/NLI_2010_2011.pdf

Note that the parents must sign for anyone under 18.

Also read para 11.

[SeattleLionsFan]

Tell me the name of the players from last year's d-line that you believe should have been great. Mattison's defense in year number one was greatly aided by the presence of Mike Martin. No one on last year's team came close to Mike Martin. You can't make chicken salad out of chicken shit.

Michigan hasn't recruited a single defensive lineman ranked as low as shiloque Calhoun.

I would have expected QWash to do something last year. Richard Ash. Brennan Beyer was a very highly regarded recruit. Jibreel black should have been at least serviceable as a DE.

Even Hoke has admitted the staff hasn't done a good job developing guys. Why is this still an argument?

[Mike]

absolutely correct Liney. Do you think it has anything to do with the rule of no helmut-helmut contact during practice?

I know that no one agrees with me, but I'd rather have a Narduzi-style defense that attacks. I think Seattle just showed the advantage of having that kind of attitude.

I'm of the opinion that you have to play defense with an attitude to be successful. An offense can be more finesse to a certain extent but a defense has to be mean and nasty. The Seahawks are the blueprint. I don't know how it shakes out in CFB but in the Super Bowl the team with the best defense in the regular season is 14-5 and 5-1 against the #1 offense. Despite all the offensive innovations over the past decade or so it still comes down to defense. Alabama can attest to that at the college level and the 49ers and Seahawks are proof in the NFL. The best teams play the best defense and those defenses are physical.

[hack]

absolutely correct Liney. Do you think it has anything to do with the rule of no helmut-helmut contact during practice?

I know that no one agrees with me, but I'd rather have a Narduzi-style defense that attacks. I think Seattle just showed the advantage of having that kind of attitude.

First problem is there's nobody named Helmut on the team. If we had two Helmuts who contact each other that would help, but there's still a lot of other players who would be just standing around watching.

I agree with linesman about toughness. Overall, though, Michigan as a whole concept is not tough. Michigan is soft.

[hack]

I think Lewan may have been more polarizing than we thought.

Due to the Gibbons thing, the MSU incident, or something else?

[Mike]

Maybe he's just an asshole.

[SeattleLionsFan]

I think Lewan may have been more polarizing than we thought.

Due to the Gibbons thing, the MSU incident, or something else?

Maybe he's just an asshole.

I don't think "due" to anything. But when you look at his leadership (from the outside obviously) versus Jake Long, seems to me that Jake was a much more unifying leader.

For just one example, it was apparently teammates who reported Lewan's statement to the police. That's a huge red flag to me.