Local vs National Recruiting
The Crawford / Corley commits got me thinking about national vs local recruiting. Harbaugh seems to have tilted towards national in a way that Hoke and even RR never did. Maybe someone who followed recruiting back in Carr days could compare.
I went through the current top 10 classes to see how each school did in state vs out of state. First number is commits from within state, second is class size.
1 LSU - 12 /20
2 Michigan - 1 / 24
3 OSU - 8 /18
4 FSU - 8 / 18
5 Georgeia - 12 / 16
6 Florida - 15 / 26
7 Ol Miss - 4 / 20
8 Alabama - 4 / 17
9 ND - 0 / 22
10 Auburn 4 / 17
I think whats apparent is that Michigan has a built in disadvantage of residing in a football poor state.
If I did a bit more work I think if you considered region Michigan would stand out even more. 1 from MI, 1 IL, 1 Wisconsin, 3 from Indiana, everyone else is from out of region. Even ND has more midwest kids.
It seems like the sights view Corley and Crawford as just about even. We don't know who Harbaugh thinks will be better. I'm no scout either. But philosophically speaking, I used to think tie breaker went to the local kid since 1) he'd get our rivalvies 2) it would keep him away from our rivals. My opinion is the opposite now, possibly skewed by watching Hoke reel in local kids and also not developing talent.
This might also just be an aberation, as I think we are targetting plenty of local kids in 2017.
January 9th, 2016 at 11:54 PM ^
January 10th, 2016 at 12:10 AM ^
is that any good recruiting program should first secure its own borders. Michigan has always had and will always continue to have national reach. But I think when you are trying to lock up high-end recruits late is the recruting cycle promixity to home is a huge factor.
Now don't get me wrong, i will take a 5-star player if he comes from Mars, but for long term sustainability and benefit, you have to own your own state (and region).
There is not mystery why MSU has transformed themselves into a national power. I actually predicted MSU's program would take a big step forward when I saw RichRod turning over in-state recruting to the Spartans. MSU, unlike Michigan, didn't have a national reach, so they had to build their program largely on in-state and in-region players. When Michigan owned in-state recruriting that meant MSU would have to take our scarps. And since we had such a presence in Ohio, the Spartans had to take OSU's and UM's scraps in the Buckeye state. So in-state and regional recruiting provided two benefits, 1) you get high level talent, 2) you keep that talent from your in-state rival, who in the past couldn't go out of region to get players of that quality.
To illustrate my point consider MSU's recent classes. The pivotal year for MSU and their recruiting was 2009. That year they had 10 four-star recruits (by far their most until this year). Eight of those were from the state of Michigan. In additon, from 2010-2014, MSU landed the top ranked in-state recruit 3-out-of-4 years. If you consider Corley the top in-state recruit this year (as some do), then that would be 4-out-of-6 years.
Their record since 2009:
- 11-2 (2010)
- 11-3 (2011)
- 7-6 (2012)
- 13-1 (2013)
- 11-2 (2014)
- 12-2 (2-15)
Three Big Ten Championships and a playoff berth.
I sort of feel dirty writing those records for the Spartans. But they stepped into the void of in-state recruiting RichRod left, and they have never looked back.
So that is a long way for me to say: regardless of how well you recruit nationally, not tending to your own backyard is never a good idea.
January 10th, 2016 at 12:22 AM ^
January 10th, 2016 at 12:33 AM ^
that you should have that advantage in your own state. So in essence that should be the low hanging fruit, you just need to make sure you take the time to pick em.
And to clarify, my position isn't that you shouldn't pluck Jersey, Florida, Texas or California, but rather that no one should come to Michigan and walk away with our top players. Which they have done way too much of lately. We haven't landed the top in-state recruit since 2009, and that has to stop.
January 10th, 2016 at 12:35 AM ^
January 10th, 2016 at 12:40 AM ^
Also, in-state / in-region recruiting is just more reliable. When you go National, you run the risk of one of those years where you finish in second place for a bunch of your top targets.
If you notice, when we lose out on top National guys like Nauta, we usually lose out to the local school. Most kids still want to play within 300 miles of home.
January 10th, 2016 at 12:48 AM ^
Nauta stayed home, Terrence Davis stayed home, Delance stayed home.
I look at Corley and Crawford as a wash and I am happy to have either of them. But it doesn't take a rocket surgeon (got that from St. Vincent) to realize it is lot easier recruiting a kid 30 mintues away then a kid on the other side of country. You should be in the driver seat with the kid in your own backyard.
That is my veiled-attempt to say if we don't get Peoples-Jones, I am going to have a melt down and I will mother F everyone on this board :).
January 10th, 2016 at 1:38 AM ^