ODU coach: “You can only do 15 days in June and 15 days in July of camps. That’s four weeks we can be on vacation in the summer. Not to mention the 30 days we can’t recruit around Christmas.I am so tired of coaches complaining about quality of life when 95 percent of Americans will never touch the money or vacation time we get. Shame on us.”
Michigan has accepted a greyshirt commitment from KY S Jeremy Clark. Clark impressed the coaches at camp, but not enough to earn an immediate offer. Should he pick up a number of mid-level scholarship offers, I wouldn't expect this one to stick.
2*, NR S
Since Jeremy is effectively a member of the 2013 recruiting class (pending a decision from OH S Jarrod Wilson) and also very under-the-radar, this section should be brief. HOWEVA, with Brian unavailable, why not profile a guy who's basically a preferred walk-on at this point?
As you can see, the recruiting sites aren't so high on Clark. Scout is the only site with a ranking for him, and even that is a lowly 2-star. The sites are in accord there, and also on his size: He's a consensus 6-4 (ESPN says 6-2), with two votes for 205 pounds and two votes for 185 pounds. I'll go with 195 then.
This 6-4, 175-lb. safety was the surprises of the day. He flashed good speed and EXCELLENT ball skills. He is a bit of a sleeper on the national scale because he grew four inches since last fall. Just as impressive was the fact that he soaked up the coaching like a sponge and just seemed to really be relishing the overall experience.
Of course it's in their best interests to talk kids up as sleepers, so take it as a grain of salt. It's sleeper bluster, but in the parlance of sleeper bluster, height, ball skills and coachability are nice compliments for any system.
Clark aso drew "plenty of attention" from Ohio State's staff at their camp ($, info in header), but apparently they didn't see enough to offer him. He is pictured OMG SHIRTLESS at right.
Most of Clark's full scholarship offers came from the MAC. Akron, Ball State, Central Michigan, Ohio, and Toledo were his offers from the Big Ten's JV league. NC State was his only other BCS-level scholarship offer.
His Rivals profile has junior year stats: 75 tackles, 3 interceptions, and 8 pass breakups. That's not a ringing endorsement of Scout's "ballhawk" characterization, but it's certainly not bad either.
FAKE 40 TIME
Rivals says 4.47. That is very fast. A kid with Clark's size is not an unranked prospect at this point in the recruiting cycle if he's actually that fast. I'm going to have to go with 4 FAKEs out of five.
PREDICTION BASED ON FLIMSY EVIDENCE
This guy is a greyshirt prospect for a reason. At one step ahead of preferred walk-on, it's tough to see him accomplishing much until very late in his career, as is usually the case for these guys. He'll greyshirt the fall of his first year (pay his own way and, if I'm not mistaken, not practice with the team), then join the squad as a redshirt freshman in the spring.
I see him being a special teams contributor as a redshirt junior and senior, and the type of guy who gets a few plays in the secondary, but not much more.
Of course, if he is the level of sleeper that Scout's recap above seems to imply, he could also blow up once he gets into college, and absorb all the coaching (and weight training, etc.) available to him, becoming a contributor by the time he leaves campus.
UPSHOT FOR THE REST OF THE CLASS
As a greyshirt, he doesn't affect much about this class. The needs are still offensive line, defensive tackle, wideout, and - with lesser emphasis - quarterback/running back.
i'm sorry but this post goes a bit too far with it's negativity. Brian has nice ways of saying the role players have - this sounds flat out rude in parts.
the kid just said he'd rather go to UM and pay for a semester than play for Illinois full-ride from the start. things like "it's tough to see him accomplishing much until very late in his career (if at all)" should be left to Rivals or the like to say, not the home blog of the team he just committed to.
I don't see what's snarky about saying a preferred walkon and/or greyshirt will hardly contribute in his career. That's the norm for these guys. I even said that there's a chance he surprises, not sure what else I can say without being dishonest.
rudeness/overzealous 'honesty' is much like pornography - "I know it when I see it."
i personally feel i see it. if you don't, that's just your perception - free for all to utilize. my only argument is that the post welcoming a person to the site's home team should probably utilize as much as tact as possible as compared to, say, a class analysis.
this is his moment to shine and he's already been hit at the knees by a fan site. that's all.
the job of this site is to make kids feel good about their commitments. It's to provide an accurate assessment of their skills. If Tim had said "Jeremy Clark is a total jackass who should be ashamed of himself," I'd agree with you. But he didn't do that at all.
There is no time, sir, at which ties do not matter.
look at it this way: Wilson doesn't commit, this is going to be an immediate scholarship athlete for the University of Michigan. i don't expect someone who Brady Hoke and company is will to give 4-5 years of PT and space to receive this lukewarm/crappy of a reception.
It's just my opinion. i also think if it was a user who went on a diatribe of an MGoBoard post with the same assertions, downvotes and snark would be rained down.
we shouldn't eat our own and put an aggressive ceiling above them before they've played a down.
I don't believe it's Mgoblog's job to give commits a "reception" or anything like that. I think it's the blog's job to give an unbiased analysis and projection of the player. That's how Mgoblog became a big deal in the first place; Brian created a massive project (UFR) that attempts to figure out which players are helping and hurting the team.
If we feel like we have to avoid negative evaluations of recruits because they're coming to Michigan and because we want to be sensitive to their feelings, then I think I'd rather not have the Hello: posts at all.
There is no time, sir, at which ties do not matter.
There's a big difference between a hello post saying, "Frankly it's shocking the sites didn't rate Ray Vinopal as a 5 star" and making what seems like, frankly, a relatively uninformed (for good reason because there's not much out there but there were also other offers not mentioned in the post) and pesimistic guess about a recruit's abilities. There's a reason Brian's players this reminds me of doesn't list marques slocum, or other complete busts.
That's an entertaining weekly diversion, but not something that should be taken as gospel. It because popular because it is a fan site from a fan's perspective, except by a guy who writes in a much more entertaining and creative way than most of could. I know you're a numbers crunching kind of guy, but all the charts in the world wouldn't be attracting very many readers if Brian wasn't also putting out content that amusing and funny.
but I do think it's true that the proprietor of this blog has a numbers-crunching, analytical view of the world, and of Michigan football. He's written a number of posts about how recruiting rankings are predictive of future success, and I just don't see this post as something at all outside of what Mgoblog is based on.
If Tim's wrong and Clark blows up because he gained 4 inches without losing any speed at all, that's fantastic. I hope like hell it happens. But recruiting is all probabilities, and Tim's evaluation is probably closer to the likely outcome than Clark becoming a star. I think it's fine that Tim said that, and I don't think he did it in an overly harsh way. I do think recruiting coverage in general is probably well-served by a bit more pessimism/skepticism/whatever you want to call it, but YMMV.
There is no time, sir, at which ties do not matter.
Sure, and I get he appeals to the number cruncher in you
And all the ones out there, for that reason. And that's cool too. I guess I would say temper the negativity as much as the excitement (which I think you're misreading people if they're saying "say this kid will be All-Big Ten by his sophomore year), particularly in a case like this. I know with ALL recruits, the accurate answer is "I don't know"...but a little more of that in a case like this might be nice. Because A. there's isn't a lot of film and such on him, so it's not like he can really make an accurate assessment, B. a lot has changed since last fall, obviously, in the kid C. they just had him at camp, and people other than the coaches have said nice things about him D. the recruiting situation makes it one where an immediate offer might have been forthcoming in another year/situation. The coaches saw something in him. And if they're right, he might blow up this fall, and then the Hello: post looks silly. Better to say there isn't a lot out there on him, so it's hard to say; and his senior season will be really important for evaluation. And he's not taking up a scholarship at the moment, so he's no risk, and all potential upside. That's honest, and fairly evaluative, without blowing sunshine up a kid's ass.
and I think that's completely wrong. I think some people around here turn the "don't bash recruits" rule (which is a really important one) into "don't question the abilities of anyone with a Michigan offer," which I think is a bad one.
There is no time, sir, at which ties do not matter.
the entire review of the athlete focuses on the fact he isn't rated highly and, as a result, won't likely pan out, or even play at Michigan. there is little to no analysis beyond that.
the post comes off pissed that he was offered, IMO. if it went through and showed difficulty understanding plays or had fitness issues, fine. but everything else i've read from impartial third parties have said his assessments do not take into account his height gains and, subsequently, future 'expansion' of talents.
go through the post. every positive thing about the kid is shot down. short of Tim having gone and watched this kid and having a different opinion, i think a lot more neutral/optimism could/should be utilized, especially because he camped in front of Hoke et. al and received this offer which is actionable in 2013, a year in which some significant holes will need to be filled again.
he isn't highly rated and doesn't have a great offer sheet does mean that he's unlikely to pan out. I agree that his growth spurt is a point in his favor, but it hasn't been accompanied by a big expansion of his offer sheet yet. After following recruiting for a few years now, I've just become really cynical about "sleeper" prospects whose "explosion" isn't accompanied by an increase in offers (Standifer got an ND offer, Omameh got an OSU one, for example). Every fanbase wants to believe its sleepers really are sleepers, even when they're not. It's definitely possible that Clark is about to blow up, which would be great, but I don't feel like Tim's post ignored that possibility.
There is no time, sir, at which ties do not matter.
is very few schools have seen him at his new height. The limited times would be camps and spring evaluations. Based on his camp performance, UM felt he deserved a scholarship. The biggest thing with him will obviously be to watch his development in his senior year (I know very obvious statement, but I think applies in this case even more). This isn't a late offer senior year hoping that a sleeper pans out.
I think the camping part is really important. Essentially any analysis we can do is through a 5-minute Youtube clip. The coaches got to see him up close in drills they wanted to see him run and were enamoured enough to offer a greyshirt to find a way to get him to Michigan. Clearly they see B1G talent and they're far more apt to know that when they see it then we are. He isn't ranked (right now) but between recruiting sites evals and a camp offer from the coaches, I'm erring on the side of the coaches.
the fact that he isn't highly rated and doesn't have a great offer sheet does mean that he's unlikely to pan out.
Sam Webb pointed out the other day that Clark hasn't even been evaluated by the rating sites. Since when does "not rated" equal "not highly rated"? The Hello post also fails to note that Clark has an offer from another BCS school—Illinois—even though it's clearly listed in his Rivals profile.
I also don't understand why "grayshirt" is being equated to "preferred walk-on." Clark is being offered a grayshirt because the coaching staff at this time isn't ready to offer him a scholarship for 2012. But they may yet, and they have comitted to giving him a scholarship for 2013. That isn't anything like a preferred walk-on.
The Illinois offer was not in his Rivals profile at the time that I wrote the post this morning. If it had been, I would have included it. It's not like I'm dogging the kid because I don't like him, I was just compiling the available information on him.
This isn't that important, but I just want to note that the Illinois offer wasn't added to his Rivals profile since you wrote the post. It was there on Wednesday when I mentioned it in this post. Later that day, when I checked his profile again, no offers were listed at all, so perhaps that's what you saw when you checked his profile. So perhaps you just had the bad luck of checking on his profile at the wrong time, when the offer list was unavailable for some reason.
things have changed greatly for Jeremy. Yes, his offer sheet right now isn't all that impressive, but where was Taylor Lewans at this point in his HS career or Jake Fishers for that matter.
As far as the expansion of his offer sheet, this may have been the first camp he has attended since the change in his physical status. If that's the case it is obvious why his offer sheet hasn't expanded.
A failure to recognize that the recruiting rankings available are really just in their draft stage at the moment. The senior seasons for all these recruits has yet to happen. Player rankings will rise and fall—look at Wormley's preformance sophomore vs junior year. Jeremy's tacked on 4-inches, is out attending camps and soaking everything up. I'm guessing he easily is bumped to a three star just based on his size/speed and coachability, not to mention the attention he has drawn.
A repeat national championship in 2017…what better way to celebrate the bicentennial?
Are way too sensitive and are coming across as a whiny school boy.
Your assessment of Tim's assessment is not true.
"However, a guy with Clark's height is a major asset with good ball skills, and being coachable is huge in any system. "
"Of course, if he is the level of sleeper that Scout's recap above seems to imply, he could also blow up once he gets into college, and absorb all the coaching (and weight training, etc.) available to him, becoming a contributor by the time he leaves campus"
Yeah, that sounds like he just trashed the kid endlessly. More like he was realistic and you are one of the many Michigan fans who can't handle the reality that perhaps not everyone that commits to Michigan or played for Michigan is flawless. I bet you were one of the people who screamed at their TV in anger over Bilas's Bias!!!!! last night when Jay Bilas gave an accurate description Darius Morris' game.
Perhaps you need to find a magic lamp or a Tinkerbell and make your way into a fairy tale as reality doesn't seem to suit you.
but edits have taken place on the post that could include those two items. you also proved to have zero idea about my regular commentary on this site given your assertions of me being a sunny blowhard of player talent.
None of that was edited into the post. The only edit that took place was adjusting the alingment of the pictures, because the mgo-interface screws with it between my blogging software and the finished product.
For "accurate assessment of skills" of guys they've never seen play, by guys who aren't exactly football coaches, and not just a compilation of other infomation (in addition to the entertaining writing and stuff a blog CAN provide) you're probably coming to the blog for the wrong thing.
I agree with this. My instant reaction when I read the hello post was that the tone was overboard, and inappropriate given both that I think Tim's being objectively too pesimistic about how good Clark can be for us and that he just committed/there isn't that much info out there so if you're best guess is that negative I think it's better not to make it. In the past I've also been surprised at the disparaging tone used to describe the coaching recruits get at Cass Tech given that all of us as michigan fans should wake up every morning grateful that coaching staff is where it is
FWIW, I agree with you. Seems to me that in this circumstance the offer of a grayshirt is less like a preferred walk-on (with no promise of any available scholarship - just if one is available) and more like a full offer but hey we can't fit you into the 2012 class because of numbers and an existing offer to Wilson (i.e. he is penciled in as part of the 2013 numbers). With the way Hoke has been going, I don't think a spot in the 2013 class is something to be taken lightly. I think the staff views Clark as 100% worthy of a full scholarship but because of the numbers crunch (seems clear they only want 4 DBs in this class) and the offer to Wilson, they couldn't commit to it.
And I agree that, in light of that and a full ride offer from NC State among others, the Hello post was way too negative. I fully expect this kids to be a contributor.
on 1st glance through, it does comes across as negative and a little harsh.
IIRC from the other posts about him, it sounds like if Jarrod Wilson doesn't commit, then he wold get his scholarship. Not sure if this is confirmed or speculation pieced together from quotes in the posts. If that's the case, it would suggest the staff thinks that he's much more than just a step above walk-on status.
consiering the talent we pushed away at DB already this year, I think the coaching staff is really high on this kid, I know this is a slight slam to some of the other DBs that commited but I would dare say if the staff saw this kid a month ago he would have a schollie for this year from what I'm reading about him. Jarod Wilson is better thant his kid but I think this kid pottentially has more upside then any other DB in our current class.
In as much as this kid's ceiling is unkown, sure. No one can know what he can accomplish because it's as if he just emerged from a cocoon with a brand new body. So really, all we know is what's happened since he "evolved" from an ignored prospect to a lanky giant, which has been all to the positive.
I mean...the kid has BCS scholarship offers. Some coaches seem to think he can play.
First of all, he's not a grey shirt/walk on, he's just a greyshirt. And secondly, why does that make him unlikely to contribute? You could argue it makes him less likely to contribute than Wilson, but that's about it. Even if we get Wilson, Hoke is confident enough in this kid to give him a 2013 scholarship when we are likely to not have many available. That to me says that Hoke and staff thinks he's a solid player who they think can contribute.
the first thing about the kid not be "he's basically a giant waste of time but maybe he'll show up during EMU." i'm sorry but this doesn't go into "honesty." it's probably 10x more honest to say it's too early to say what, or when, his spot on a depth chart will be but at this time he's received MAC-level offers. not say he's pine warming. it almost sounds like you're pissed he dared to commit.
It may be true that this kid will never play a meaningful snap. Or, it might be true that Hoke and his staff see a ton of potential in this kid, which is why they are offerning him a 2013 spot.
Looking at someone who is going into their senior year, having grown 4 INCHES (!!!) at a position where height can be important, where a recruiting site is calling him a sleeper, why not go with something like, "given these factors, there is no way to really predict what role this kid will have. While his low rankings, greyshirt offer would seem to indicate a career of spot back-up duty, given his height / speed combo, his described "ballhawkishness" and his potential upside, there is a chance that he could ba a true safety and see significant playing time as an upperclassman."
To me, that is not sugarcoating, it is accurate.
Also, Jeremy, if you are reading this, welcome to Michigan. Hope that you bust your ass and prove any doubters wrong. Oh, and from now on you might want to be on the lookout for a certain Angry Michigan Safety Hating Deity.
The growth spurt is a clue that he may be a late bloomer, and worth the "risk' of a greyshirt offer. I think Dennis Rodman was 5' 11" when he graduated high school. I know it's a different sport and I'm not saying that Clark will be a comparable athlete, I'm just making the point that some people physically mature later than others. If that is the case here, he could be a real steal.
"Do you want me to sugarcoat things or be honest?"
This obvious sense of omnipotence by folks like Tim and Brian is one of the main reasons this blog has gone so far down hill (I am here because I followed TomVH's tweet).
Lets be clear what are you being honest about. You can be honest about how you feel, what you predict based on the evidence, or what has actually happened. But you cannot be honest about the future, for the future has yet to happen. The subject of your honesty, this guy's potential, is based on your feelings, based on very little evidence (such as the extent to which he has been evaluated by the scouting services). Yet you couch it as some accurate vision of the future. You take your intuition and project that into the future, and then claim that this kid basically will warm the bench for the other guys, and fail to admit uncertainty to the degree you should if you wanted to be mature or responsible toward a kid. You take whatever snapshots the scouting services took of this kid, downgrade those based on some intuition of your own, and then hold that to be gospel. For instance - you take his 40 time and say '4 fakes out of 5' just because the other scouting service do not rate him highly. Do you know that the others fully evaluated this kid? Might this kid have gotten faster? Or, might he have gotten taller, thu gaining him more attention at the next round of assessments?
Other evidence you use is the greyshirt. Might this be because the coaching staff has the remaining open slots, now that we have 16 commits, basically penciled in? My guess is that they said they plan to take one more safety, and have already offered that spot to WIlson (or have all remaining safety spots offered). Having the other spots filled, their hands are tied (this, of course, changes when that once-in-a-decade prospect comes around). This might not be the case - but in your haste to label this kid a waste, with in your grandiose assumption of knowing all, you probably didn't even consider this possibility.
You are no soothsayer Tim. Come down off your high horse. There is a lot of uncertainty here. Try to be somewhat mature and responsible when you put things up like this about a kid.
Lately when I check this site, or more often when TomVH's tweets lead me here, I find myself agreeing with you waaay more than I did in the past. I am not sure exactly why, but I think it is a small sign of the fanbase reuniting under Hoke. Perhaps that is a bit of a grand theory derived from little evidence, but I think it has something to do with it.
That readers started thinking they're experts on all things Michigan Football, or they started thinking it so readers started believing it? I don't know. Sure, I'm sure there are those who only watch the games on Saturday, have no football background, and really DO find them full of knowledgable information. But if this site is going to lean towards UFRs imparting their knowledge on the unwashed masses, count me out. I'll trust my on eyes on that stuff, and certainly trust the coaches a lot more than that. It's not like the predictive nature of this site has been all that accurate for the last 3 years. The Blog is about informing (combing the Net and finding info, and compiling it in one place), being entertaining and fun in a creative way not many could do, showing the fan's feelings in written word (the grand and the stupid), and creating discussion. I don't think Jerry Hanlon is contributing.
If it's supposed to be hard hitting news, then be news and not a blog and be fast and accurate. This was the 3RD post on the Blog that he had committed (one each on the Board and Diaries).
"The Blog is about informing (combing the Net and finding info, and compiling it in one place), being entertaining and fun in a creative way not many could do, showing the fan's feelings in written word (the grand and the stupid), and creating discussion."
If this were the case, I would participate much more often. I think the site owner and moderators have let their ability to manipulate numbers and use stats go to their heads (although their tools are still very superficial). They have misplaced the ability to predict using numbers and stats, with the accuracy of prediction. They have misplaced the use of stats with the assumption of being scientific. Put differently, confidence in prediction is not the same as accuracy of understanding of cause and effect relationships, unless the former is built from the latter. To predict using no causal relationships, and do so with claims of accuracy implicitly embedded in rash judgments, is to be very naive.
A sports prediction is always placed in an a future time-space with many unknown variables, and with many known variables whose values are unknown. Put simply, things change. That's what makes sports so fun. What matters in cases like this is how much the person predicting incorporates uncertainty in his/her prediction - how much they admit how much they do not, and cannot, know. And then of course, how they assess what is known in the face of how much is not, and cannot be, known.