The Michigan front 7 will do everything they can to take away Wimbush's legs just like everyone else did late in the season last year.
Most likely Book will be asked to win the game.
Wimbush starts, the UM front 7 shuts the offense down, and both Book and Jurkovec play, but it is too late--and it shakes their confidence. That would be an awful way to start the season.
Hopefully Wimbush is vastly improved, or one of the other QBs starts.
We have them at home, in the opener. You might fear the opener 11 years ago. I am not sure that is reasonable. This game is a W for ND, led by our overall defensive superiority over their offense messing them up throughout the game.
(no message)
For starters, there's plenty of developed depth on this team at almost every position. The offensive line is stocked decently, and the skill position players are veterans who are ready to play.
Our junior and senior players come from classes that have decent talent. It's not as if we're stuck with Tregg Duerson-level players that few FBS schools wanted.
Also, Ian Book has actual game experience under his belt, having survived a somewhat shaky start against UNC, and pulling our bacon out of the fire against an excellent LSU defense. With more reps with the first team this spring, and a better understanding about how to play in real time, I see no reason why he wouldn't be at least a serviceable player, should Wimbush go down or be pulled.
He has decent enough footspeed to pose a reasonable running threat, and has good enough arm strength and accuracy to stretch the field.
IMHO the offensive line is not stocked. The losses of the two best Oline players are huge. With respect to the skill positions, ND lost its best back and its two best wide receivers. That is a lot of ground to make up on the offensive side of the ball. There might be veterans but have not proven much so far (D. Williams, Boykin, Claypool and company). Except for Williams (possibly), I don't see any play-makers that have proven anything yet.
We might not have a 2007 Ga Tech scenario against Michigan but we could very well lose if Wimbush starts and hasn't improved vastly since last year. He has been in the system for several years now and hasn't improved. In fact he regressed during the season last year. If he starts and falters and we fall behind and Book comes in, the game could be as embarrassing as the 2007 Tech game was. As for Jurkovec, putting him in the first game against Michigan is far fetched and would be a disaster IMO.
There's no way that we can replace the left side departures. Having lost possibly the best offensive lineman of all time in the way of Nelson, and an excellent player in the way of McGlinchey, basically means that there will be a dropoff this year, regardless of who replaces them.
I still believe that the line will be at least decent this year, though. You have Mustipher, Bars, and Kraemer, who started quite a few games, plus Hainsey (who also stared some), coming back, along with Lugg and Ruhland ready to play. It's not as if we're throwing undeveloped, inexperienced players to the wolves like we did in 2007.
Granted articles at this time of the year are a bit daft, when I read his statement that "The loss of a game-breaker like Equinimeous St. Brown....." is going to negatively impact Wimbush's ypc, I knew it was a goofy "fun with numbers" exercise.
For whatever reason, whether it was disinterest or frustration, St. Brown's impact as a "game breaker" isn't going to be hard to replace.
Overall we were a run first, pass short team last year. We had only a handful of completed long passes. Teams defended us that way with Georgia and Miami FL being the most effective. No matter what happens in Spring ball we will, until we demonstrate a long passing game (and hopefully will) teams try to make us one dimensional while focusing on stopping our short passing game.
Agree with your comment in that while St Brown was our leading receiver his total number of catches and yards doesn't look much like a game breaker. With Kizer there for his SR year he would have had far better stats more reflective of his speed and athleticism.
The biggest issue to be solved is how to get the ball deep and hit receivers in stride. Last year BW didn't do that in the early games and we stopped running those patterns as the season went on. Think part of the issue was play calling: inexperience = simple reads to avoid turnovers resulting in almost all passes being less than 20 yards. When early results on long passes were not good the focus was on what worked.
Given the issues at RB (we can't afford to run too much as we not only have to avoid injuries but also don't want them beaten up by seasons end) we need to have a "normal" passing game that will keep us two dimensional vs anyone. For BW to lead that think we need to see both better and faster recognition and mechanics that give us a long passing game. Hope that happens.
Kevin Stepherson is the game breaking receiver that will be missed.
ESB certainly flashed in '16 as a receiver with potential. Perhaps his ability to show more in '17 was limited by his qb but I also saw a lot of dropped balls, lazy routes and lack of effort. To state, as the author does, that he will be missed in '18 as a "game breaker" is a true leap in invented logic based on perceived ability, not demonstrated results. We'll see what he shows as a pro.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)