Michigan.

Donate To GopherHole
R

ruppertflywheel

Banned
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
12,226
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Has 12 committments, 7- 4**** according to Scout. Hoake really getting after it.
 

And all of their commitments so far are from Ohio and Michigan. They're getting after it in their own backyard.
 

Meh. Michigan recruits itself. They've finished #21 or better every year in the Rivals team rankings, and they only finished 21st this year because their coach was fired a month before NSD. They finish top 10, or top 15 at worst, nearly every year. I'll be more impressed when they are able to pull Ohio recruits who have OSU offers. They used to do it fairly frequently under Carr and his predecessors, but they've done it only twice since 2006. They'll never turn the tide in their rivalry if they continue to stack the roster with the Buckeyes' sloppy seconds.
 

A good strategy though, they really let OSU and MSU have a clear shot at Mich and Ohio kids for the last 5+ years. MSU isn't Mich from a recruiting standpoint nationally, but they have dominated Michigan in-state since Coach D got there, and I don't think they had to work that hard to do it, because Mich saw themselves as a "national" program. Hoke knows how they used to do it, and he will get the players in Mich and Ohio, and still get highly ranked kids from out of Florida, California and Texas.
They will still have a hard time out-recruiting OSU for Ohio kids for the next few years, but if they keep at it and have some success on the field, they can make it a lot harder on OSU than it has been. I personally would like to see OSU have to spend more energy defending in-state kids than they do now.
 

I don't think Kill offered any of them. Really they are outside the area he is looking at. Kill mentioned the other day that he would question a school's research of players if they have a lot of committments this early.
 


MaxyJR1 said:
I don't think Kill offered any of them. Really they are outside the area he is looking at. Kill mentioned the other day that he would question a school's research of players if they have a lot of committments this early.
Click to expand...

That is probably accurate for the types of players that coach Kill and schools like the U of M are recruiting but I don't think it means a school like Texas doesn't know what it is doing.
 

Sloppy seconds !!!!!!!!!!??????????...yikes

dpodoll68 said:
Meh. Michigan recruits itself. They've finished #21 or better every year in the Rivals team rankings, and they only finished 21st this year because their coach was fired a month before NSD. They finish top 10, or top 15 at worst, nearly every year. I'll be more impressed when they are able to pull Ohio recruits who have OSU offers. They used to do it fairly frequently under Carr and his predecessors, but they've done it only twice since 2006. They'll never turn the tide in their rivalry if they continue to stack the roster with the Buckeyes' sloppy seconds.
Click to expand...

Two 4**** and one 3*** from Ohio all with a plethera of offers? Send me the sloppy seconds anytime.
 

ruppertflywheel said:
Two 4**** and one 3*** from Ohio all with a plethera of offers? Send me the sloppy seconds anytime.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but according to Rivals, only two of their 12 commits had an OSU offer, so his point kinda still holds a little bit. Just cause they're still talented overall (and no doubt I would LOVE to have a class even remotely as good as theirs looks like it'll be), it doesn't mean they're not OSU's "sloppy seconds" in a way.
 

ruppertflywheel said:
Two 4**** and one 3*** from Ohio all with a plethera of offers? Send me the sloppy seconds anytime.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's great. But we're talking about Michigan, not Minnesota. By Michigan standards, there is nothing special or out-of-the-ordinary about these types of recruits. They sign them all the time. On the other hand, one thing they do not do very often is sign Ohio recruits who have OSU offers.

Think about it - would you rather sign a Wisconsin prospect who has a Vadger offer, or one without? Luckily for us, recruiting the state of Wisconsin is not a central tenet of Gopher recruiting strategy. But for Michigan, recruiting the state of Ohio is a pillar of both their team and their recruiting strategy. They wouldn't care about not signing Ohio prospects with OSU offers if they didn't recruit the state of Ohio. But, they do - heavily. How many signees did Michigan have from the state of Ohio in 2011? Seven (out of 20). How many of those Ohio signees had OSU offers? 0.0. How many signees did Michigan have from the state of Ohio in 2010? Eleven (out of 27). How many of those Ohio signees had OSU offers? 0.0.

At some point, you have to ask yourself - if I'm able to get a ton of signees from my blood rival's backyard, but none of them are actually wanted by said rival, how many of them are worth having?
 



dpodoll68 said:
Yes, that's great. But we're talking about Michigan, not Minnesota. By Michigan standards, there is nothing special or out-of-the-ordinary about these types of recruits. They sign them all the time. On the other hand, one thing they do not do very often is sign Ohio recruits who have OSU offers.

Think about it - would you rather sign a Wisconsin prospect who has a Vadger offer, or one without? Luckily for us, recruiting the state of Wisconsin is not a central tenet of Gopher recruiting strategy. But for Michigan, recruiting the state of Ohio is a pillar of both their team and their recruiting strategy. They wouldn't care about not signing Ohio prospects with OSU offers if they didn't recruit the state of Ohio. But, they do - heavily. How many signees did Michigan have from the state of Ohio in 2011? Seven (out of 20). How many of those Ohio signees had OSU offers? 0.0. How many signees did Michigan have from the state of Ohio in 2010? Eleven (out of 27). How many of those Ohio signees had OSU offers? 0.0.

At some point, you have to ask yourself - if I'm able to get a ton of signees from my blood rival's backyard, but none of them are actually wanted by said rival, how many of them are worth having?
Click to expand...

I certainly see your point, but because of the number of top football prospects in Ohio, Ohio State can pick and choose according to need. When you have a wealth of 4**** recruits it becomes a matter of "need" and what fits the program.
 

ruppertflywheel said:
I certainly see your point, but because of the number of top football prospects in Ohio, Ohio State can pick and choose according to need. When you have a wealth of 4**** recruits it becomes a matter of "need" and what fits the program.
Click to expand...

There are four major problems with your theory:

1. OSU offers most of the 4/5-star prospects in Ohio. Of the 30 4/5-star prospects in Ohio in 2010-2011, OSU offered 20 of them, and signed 14.

2. That means that there were 16 Ohio 4/5-star prospects who didn't sign with OSU. Of those, Michigan signed 0.

3. It also means that there were 10 Ohio 4-star prospects who didn't even receive an OSU offer. Of those, Michigan signed 0.

4. Michigan actually has managed to receive commits from two Ohio 4-star prospects so far in the 2012 cycle. Do either of them have OSU offers? What do you think?
 

Check Scout...

dpodoll68 said:
There are four major problems with your theory:

1. OSU offers most of the 4/5-star prospects in Ohio. Of the 30 4/5-star prospects in Ohio in 2010-2011, OSU offered 20 of them, and signed 14.

2. That means that there were 16 Ohio 4/5-star prospects who didn't sign with OSU. Of those, Michigan signed 0.

3. It also means that there were 10 Ohio 4-star prospects who didn't even receive an OSU offer. Of those, Michigan signed 0.

4. Michigan actually has managed to receive commits from two Ohio 4-star prospects so far in the 2012 cycle. Do either of them have OSU offers? What do you think?
Click to expand...

The last 3 years Michigan signed one 4**** player from Ohio each of the last 3 years. I'm assuming you were using Rivals.
 

dpodoll68 said:
Yes, that's great. But we're talking about Michigan, not Minnesota. By Michigan standards, there is nothing special or out-of-the-ordinary about these types of recruits. They sign them all the time. On the other hand, one thing they do not do very often is sign Ohio recruits who have OSU offers.

Think about it - would you rather sign a Wisconsin prospect who has a Vadger offer, or one without? Luckily for us, recruiting the state of Wisconsin is not a central tenet of Gopher recruiting strategy. But for Michigan, recruiting the state of Ohio is a pillar of both their team and their recruiting strategy. They wouldn't care about not signing Ohio prospects with OSU offers if they didn't recruit the state of Ohio. But, they do - heavily. How many signees did Michigan have from the state of Ohio in 2011? Seven (out of 20). How many of those Ohio signees had OSU offers? 0.0. How many signees did Michigan have from the state of Ohio in 2010? Eleven (out of 27). How many of those Ohio signees had OSU offers? 0.0.

At some point, you have to ask yourself - if I'm able to get a ton of signees from my blood rival's backyard, but none of them are actually wanted by said rival, how many of them are worth having?
Click to expand...

I see your point. If you are Minnesota are they worth having? IMO, yes.
 



dpodoll68 said:
Yes, that's great. But we're talking about Michigan, not Minnesota. By Michigan standards, there is nothing special or out-of-the-ordinary about these types of recruits. They sign them all the time. On the other hand, one thing they do not do very often is sign Ohio recruits who have OSU offers.

Think about it - would you rather sign a Wisconsin prospect who has a Vadger offer, or one without? Luckily for us, recruiting the state of Wisconsin is not a central tenet of Gopher recruiting strategy. But for Michigan, recruiting the state of Ohio is a pillar of both their team and their recruiting strategy. They wouldn't care about not signing Ohio prospects with OSU offers if they didn't recruit the state of Ohio. But, they do - heavily. How many signees did Michigan have from the state of Ohio in 2011? Seven (out of 20). How many of those Ohio signees had OSU offers? 0.0. How many signees did Michigan have from the state of Ohio in 2010? Eleven (out of 27). How many of those Ohio signees had OSU offers? 0.0.

At some point, you have to ask yourself - if I'm able to get a ton of signees from my blood rival's backyard, but none of them are actually wanted by said rival, how many of them are worth having?
Click to expand...

Kind of like how Minnesota used to take a bunch of kids from Ohio away from Kent State and Toledo. You can't expect to beat teams consistently that you do not beat in recruiting battles.
 

OSU will get the same penalty that USC got and was upheld today. 10 scholarships per year lost for 3 years, no bowls for 2 years. That will hurt starting in 2012.The overflow of talent will happen. Take care of the home state first then look outside.
 

Since we last visited this topic, Hoke has scored two major recruiting victories:

1) Getting a commit from an Ohio player with an OSU offer

2) Re-opening the long dormant California pipeline (one 4-star recruit in the last five years (Forcier)) and did it in style by securing a commit from a borderline 5-star recruit with offers from every major Western school not named USC.
 

It doesn't hurt that Hoke was in San Diego making connections for awhile. Anyone else have a feeling that scUM will be back in a hurry?
 

I think michigan will be back to respectability quickly, but not to greatness. Every team in the division could potentially beat Michigan and I wouldn't be surprised. Their defense was worse last year than the gophers in 2008.
 

It seems to me that there is always a spike in recruiting when a new coach is hired to replace one that's been fired. If the coach was fired, in most cases (Tressell excluded) it means he probably lost an unacceptable number of games. This in turn probably means that the players on the roster aren't all that great to begin with, or at least that's what the new coach can tell recruits.

Thus, a new coach is able to sell two key points:

1. hope/change - "we're going to be better and you have an opportunity to be a part of it".
2. playing time - "we won _ games last year - you're definitely going to have an opportunity to compete for a job right away."

These two things apply to just about every fired/hired situation. However, when you take these two things and combine them with all of the other things going in Michigan's favor (support, stadium, unbelievable local recruiting bases (MI, AND OH: Toledo, for example, is only 45 minutes from Ann Arbor), tradition, academics, OSU's situation), it is the perfect situation for Hoke to cash in on.

However, while I like Hoke (he was my first choice out of the realistic candidates that were mentioned; Kill was my third, but I am very happy to date), as we saw with Charlie Weiss and Notre Dame, top 5 recruiting classes, while nice, don't necessarily gaurantee long-term success.

Also, I recall the Army All-American game from, I think, 2002(?), when Iowa had something like seven or eight kids committ to Iowa during that game on national tv, and according to one of my friends who is a huge follower, not a single one of the 7/8 panned out - some were run out of school, dropped out, arrested, etc, etc.

So, yeah, I'd be super pumped if we were getting these types of recruits, but we've played and beaten teams built with kids of the same pedigree (Penn State, Michigan, OSU, etc, etc.).
 

MaxyJR1 said:
I don't think Kill offered any of them. Really they are outside the area he is looking at. Kill mentioned the other day that he would question a school's research of players if they have a lot of committments this early.
Click to expand...

Yeah, we probably cooled on them ;)
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom