Nick Hill is now ranked ABOVE Austin white on Rivals? As the 8th best all purpose back in the country to White's 15?! And Tony Drake is 16?
Wait What?! Nick HIll?!
He's Mike Hart, but with 4.41 speed!
Of course he is. Dantonio owns us at in state recruiting!
It will make it even sweeter when White turns out to be the better back. It is funny, though, that a guy who wasn't quite good enough to get an offer from UM and would have taken one in a heartbeat if he had is suddenly ranked higher than someone who was good enough for an offer.
There is a significant difference between the two on scout. Hill is #30 and White is #17.
It's not impossible that there has been some movement and that Hill is rates higher....
But these are still high school juniors, seniors this fall, with another year of high school ahead of them. I'm sure there will be more movement yet.
Austin White had offers from Michigan, MSU, Illinois, LSU, etc. Nick Hill had offers from MSU and... MSU.
I think we got the better back.
Don't sell Nick Hill short. He also has offers from EMU, CMU, Toledo and Kent State!!!
are convinced that White won't play RB so they have downgraded him.
Cuz I'm pretty sure that that's what we are recruiting him for...
He's got hands and he's shifty, I smell slot?
One of them (Scout I believe) kept talking about how good he would be at safety. Maybe, but I think he'll be a better RB.
are the positions most often mentioned. And that's just the national guys' view, they don't really take into account UM's viewpoint.
Don't worry about Drake - he's ranked that high despite only carrying the ball like 50 times last year. As the new starter at a nationally-known power, he has a chance to make a huge in-season surge in the rankings. He's got more upside than Hill or White, IME.
thats a great call. I think he'll have a great season and we'll be glad to have him in AA.
Nationally known power and in a football talent rich part of the country unlike Michigan high school football.
You da' man Huss!
... is that I don't recall Nick Hill outperforming White in any of the camps or events. I'm not sure when their ratings were last updated, but assuming it was after their junior seasons were completed, I don't know upon what body of work they base these new assessments.
Again, I don't follow it as closely as others, so maybe I missed something about Nick Hill blowing up in a camp, but I don't think that would have happened. What I heard was he can't catch the ball.
and I think this has more to do with White dropping in the eyes of Rivals rather than Hill climbing.
IIRC, Hill put up a strong 40 time at his MSU camp, which lead to his offer. Recruiting services will cream their pants over a fast 40. I dont think Austin White has quite the straight line speed. Definitely still remains a better prospect tho.
Amen on Drake.
I watched his highlight video to kill some time today and read an article about him. He is 1 of 9 guys on that team that will be playing at d-1 schools. NINE...and he is a star. his highlight video is sick. he is a stud and we were the first and only to offer him. pat white wasn't an accident...rr AND staff are all over this shit.
I have never followed things in the offseason like have this year, especially recruiting. FUCK these rankings. they are all bullshit.
If you read any of my previous posts, i am typically rational an level-headed, even about all things sparty and osu. but...
FUCK both of them. this is our year and it is the first of many. we went 3-9 last year while other teams executed gameplans within long standing systems and we were still basically practicing and learning.
we will win easily (maybe not big in terms of points) againt WMU and then open up the playbook against ND in week 2 and every fucking recruit on the sideline that day will want to be part of the next decade's USC/OK/Florida.
Modern day system and competitive spirit of Urban soaked in the tradition and pageantry of The University of Michigan.
this is the best post/comment i have ever seen on this site. good energy; plays well to the optimists like myself. this is the sort of energy the team will be punching with come
game-day, way too far away. I am happy to see our team recruit speed instead of "local boy really wants an offer and he looks a lot like mike hart". since rodriguez started his job at uofm, michigan has been consistently taking "3 star" recruits that can run fast over "3 and 4 star" recruits from the frozen states that have gone to michigan's camp since grade 8. I understand the nicety of rewarding consistent campers, but damn, am i glad that we are finally getting faster as a team. speed is the name of the game in the national picture. and the national picture is what all of us here are looking towards. go blue.
I am considering adopting this as my own personal manifesto for the coming season.
you should be giving the pre-game speeches in Michigan's locker room! I'm sitting here typing this in my work cubicle and I'm all fired up!
It's July. Who cares about rankings?
It's 2009. Who cares about rankings?
I think the answer to both of these questions is that everybody cares, at least a little bit. I think that if we were reeling in every 5*, a lot more people would want to talk about it. (Or at least not say they didn't care at all.)
I fully agree that things are blown out of proportion, but hey... it is fodder for otherwise pretty dead offseason places like message boards.
I totally agree, I was just dripping with sarcasm at that moment. I think once the season roles around we'll be fine, and the results will ease some of the worries on here and around the internet.
ok yeah we all wanted austin white more than nick hill but hills also one heck of a player and who cares if he got ranked higher...when it comes to the spread offense, guys like white and drake who are more elusive are worth more than mere rivals rankings...
Here's what we've generally consensus-ed on the board so far:
- Nick Hill's board bio called him a Mike Hart-ish style back. Cue MGoBoard love fest (If Brian had said "Alijah Bradley-style back" or "Tim Bracken-style back" we wouldn't be talking).
- Hill supposedly would have committed if he got an offer from M
- Hill had GPA questions
- M made an offer contingent on how well he did at camp
- After camp, Hill did not get a commitment
Here's some speculation:
- Nick Hill is a "Sad Josh" -- RR held back an offer while going strong after a number of Nick's teammates over several classes. M gave him one camp opportunity to change opinions -- after that, he did not receive a scholarship offer. If Michigan really really wants him, this is a pretty odd way of showing it
- Austin White was a major target of both schools; his commitment to M over State, where he has two brothers (who didn't get M offers), was as clear-cut an example as you could ask for of Michigan and MSU being on different recruiting levels in the state
- Rivals tends to overrate players who are not committed, and vice versa, because nobody's refreshing their Rivals page every hour so they don't miss any news about a committed player
- When all is said and done, if Sparty gets Hill, MSU fans will ignore all of this and believe they've locked up the best running back in state, and claim that it represents how Dantonio is making MSU the premier football program in the State of Michigan -- which will then change its name to the State of Michigan State.
- After two years in East Lansing, Hill will forget that he ever dreamt of being a Wolverine and grow an enormous chip on his shoulder.
in the first set of bullit points should read "After camp Hill did not receive an offer" not committment. Just sayin'
Although, from the coaches' side of things, a "committable offer" may be the more appropriate title.
The only GPA questions about Nick Hill were weather or not he would be the smartest student athlete on the team. He plans to graduate early, and wants to get his masters in 5 years. I really dont believe that grades played into his decision.
Probably won't take that long.
I agree with those above that are pointing out that we GOT who WE wanted. Which is an important thing, last year we missed on a few high rated QBs that de-committed or enrolled at OSU. Looking at it this year, RR and the Staff are going for the players we need for our system. Their strategy has been apparent for months and is unwaivering. Sure they are going to go for some fliers that are locks to other schools. And they definately are going to evaluate every instate kid. But ultimately if we didnt offer one guy or the other, it is because we dont need them.
We have addressed needs and covered the instate guys we needed. We are on the heels of several CBs and guys with strong UofM interest.
So this really begs the question, are Tony Drake/Drew Dileo/Cornelius Jones/Courtney Avery - the guys we needed? If they prove to be, then we will learn quickly that this staff is capable of doing more than just paying $99/year for a rivals login.
And that is really what is important.
Can anyone explain to me why there is sometimes such a great discrepancy in rankings between certain recruiting websites? Is it because each recruiting analyst weighs certain characteristics more heavily than others?
Because they are different peoples opinions.
The simple fact is this:
Rivals shuffling of the ranking does not, in the least, change the player than either Nick Hill or Austin White are. If White turns out to be the better player, then the satisfaction that MSU fans can take now will be impossibly short lived. If Hill turns into the better player, our indignant cries of outrage right now will seem awfully petty. In other words: this really doesn't matter.
If you need to make yourself feel better about it, know that Rodriguez expressed a clear preference between the two kids. Is he neccesarily right? Of course not. But I'd venture to say that he knows more than any of us. Or, you could capriciously decide to make Scout your bible of recruiting, rather than Rivals, where White is a 4-star #17 RB in the nation, while Hill is a 3-star #30 RB in the nation.
In response to the first half of this post:
I understand that people can confuse the causal arrow when it comes to recruiting rankings, but let's be careful when we discuss this. Sure, the rankings don't affect the quality of a given player. But they generally do reflect how good a player is. If the rankings show that a particular player is say the 20th best player at his position where he used to be 30th best, the proper conclusion should be that the services think the player is better than they had originally thought.
To insinuate that our perceived value of the player should not change is quite the intellectual slight of hand.