Wolverine247 Board

Tremendous had two recent posts on who our 2014 commits could be.

I agreed with everyone on the first 5. I didn't agree with a few of his choices in the next 4.

Namely, I think Kizer is the better option over Stewart. Ideally, the coaches will be able to take both and then let competition dictate the winner.

Stewart has better potential for the future offense. We need to evaluate what the 'future' offense will be, and gap how these recruits would fit. If the offense stayed the same as today (hybrid), Kizer makes more sense. However .... the future offense bettwe suits Stewart, as he seems more pro-style/drop back passer.

Kizer definitely fits in a pro-style offense. He would be deadly in Borges's system.

I see no reason why they can't take both. The depth is terrible at QB and whoever wins the competition in summer practices, gets the back up position.

Re: Stewart and Kizer
I believe they both will be offered around the same time, and I get the vibe that Stewart would jump on the offer very quickly while Kizer would be more inclined to wait which is why he was on the list, but Kizer wasnt.

I do think Stewart and Kizer could possibly both commit to Michigan, because neither are worried about competition.

Disagree.

The game has changed and, unfortunately, most don't realize it.

Most people still think that lining up under center + dropping back automatically means pro-style. It doesn't. The passing spread has worked its way into the pro-style such that a formation which positions a QB under center can actually be a spread passing play designed to create gaps in space.

Moreover, while Kizer is more comfortable in a shotgun formation, he can be taught to play under center. On the other hand, Stewart can't be taught Kizer's speed and elusiveness.

I like both Stewart and Kizer and would be happy if Michigan lands either one. Both would be incredible but don't see that happening.

In my opinion, Kizer has just a little bit more potential than Stewart based on his athleticism. But i think Stewart is the safer recruit. Stewart appears to be further along in regards to reading defenses and being able to go through his progressions.

I agree with this on passing downs. The run game that Hoke and Borges want to run though will require a lot of plays from under center.

Well yeah but if your run game is based from under center your going to need to pass some from under center to keep the defenses guessing.

how fast is kizer?

I have no doubt that he is a good fit, I just think Kizer is a good fit also and a better long term prospect. My biggest concern about getting a qb in the 2014 class in general is that they don't ever see any significant snaps period, regardless of who it is. Coaches seem to like Bellomy... so I have hard time believing Shane is just going to come in and beat out Bellomy considering he's been in the system longer once Devin graduates, then you have whichever qb they take in 2014 and presumably a guy like Jayru Campbell out of Cass Tech in 2015 coming in a year later if they get him. Obviously this is all wild speculation, but out those 4 qb's(Morris, Stewart, Kizer, Campbell) Stewart has the least amount of physical talent. IMO, it's going to be hard for which ever 2014 qb they take to crack the starting lineup, but I think Kizer stands the best chance at it given his high ceiling. So I guess what im trying to say is, I don't want to take Stewart then watch him sit on the end of the roster for 4 years essentially "taking up space". I understand you always need depth at qb because not everybody is going to pan out, but I would rather allocate the scholarship elsewhere or take my chances on Kizers long term potential.

Fair enough, I would be happy with either as well.

I don't have a 40 yard time for him but he's fast enough to be a legitimate dual-threat.

I think what endears Kizer to me is that he knows when to hang in the pocket and when to take off (something that Denard had to learn and is still working on improving). I just like players that are instinctive and have the intangibles.