Recruiting Class Size

Submitted by Marley Nowell on
Looking at the depth chart, counting Kelvin Grady and not Sherdian, I believe we have 65 players on scholarship for 2010. Does that mean RR will only sign 20 players this year? We have 15 commitments already and probably will add Austin White and Cullen Christian. We also need a punter with the Great Space Emperor leaving AA. Assuming no de-commits(or at most 1-2) we don't have many schollies left. I think we need a DT and a ILB, and another OL wouldn't hurt. Thoughts?

TomVH

July 10th, 2009 at 12:35 AM ^

With the exception of White, they will be focusing on defense from now on. That doesn't mean they'll stop recruiting some of the top offensive kids, but they need to even it out on the defensive side.

The Other Brian

July 10th, 2009 at 12:44 AM ^

This is true. As much hand-wringing as people are doing over the defensive recruiting, I can guarantee RR and Robinson are just as much aware of it, and will address it. After White (and possibly a punter), it'll be supers only on offense. Henderson, Wilson, Clements/Gainer/Clay, Prater...those are the only guys I can think of on O that would have a spot now if they wanted to come.

Irish

July 10th, 2009 at 1:19 AM ^

I think he is still looking for a OSU offer, which is supposed to be decided within a week, so I have heard, but if that doesn't happen UM would seem to be the next logical destination, imo EDIT: with them missing on Fiedorowicz it is probably likely he gets that offer now so a lack of interest would make sense

ShockFX

July 10th, 2009 at 12:58 AM ^

We're at 15 commits already. Assuming 2 more OL (likely even if not Henderson/Wilson)(17) White (makes 18) Punter (19), that only leaves 3-4 spots for D. 2 CBs, then what? A DT and a Safety? We still don't have a true MLB in this class do we?

The Other Brian

July 10th, 2009 at 1:05 AM ^

I don't think DT is as big a need as everyone else seems to. With the new defensive scheme, it's rare that UM will have two DTs on the field at the same time. Martin, Campbell, Sageese, Helmuth is a senior-free depth chart. Unless they can sway someone at the top of the heap (Floyd), I don't think they should reach for someone like Hankins. MLB is a little more interesting. Again. no seniors with Ezeh - Fitz - Demens - Smith, but Fitz could eventually backup Mouton, and there are some questioning Smith's dedication to moving to linebacker. And then there's the fact that there aren't exactly a lot of MLB prospects out there...

ShockFX

July 10th, 2009 at 1:34 AM ^

If they don't pick up a DT this year, then at some point they'd have a depth chart of Martin (Sr), Campbell (Jr) and 1 or 2 TRUE freshman. In this case, they'd need those freshman to be Martin's freshman-year caliber. I kind of think you have to take a shot here at getting at least a high 3* type prospect.

kofine05

July 10th, 2009 at 2:06 AM ^

not that i want it to happen, but it wouldnt shock me in the least bit if a receiver that is committed to us decommits. I think we are at 5 receivers now. Im sure some of those commits have to be looking around at who is coming in with him and thinking he is never going to see the field. idk, just a hunch. Hopefully they all stay though.

Magnus

July 10th, 2009 at 3:31 AM ^

I've been saying this for a while. I truly believe that not all the current receivers will sign with us on NSD (or that someone will change positions). In regards to the main thread, there are probable departures like Wright and Cone. And I don't remember the last year where there wasn't a random departure (Clemons, Horn, Kates, Mister Simpson, Cobrani Mixon, Schifano, etc.). This class will probably be at least 23, if not 25.